157 files changed, 6987 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6833f05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+* text=auto
+*.txt text
+*.md text
diff --git a/27238-8.txt b/27238-8.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8d5a4cf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-8.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2110 @@
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of Woodworking Tools 1600-1900, by Peter C. Welsh
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: Woodworking Tools 1600-1900
+
+Author: Peter C. Welsh
+
+Release Date: November 12, 2008 [EBook #27238]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WOODWORKING TOOLS 1600-1900 ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Chris Curnow, Joseph Cooper, Greg Bergquist
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+https://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+_Cover design after engraving from Diderot._
+
+
+  CONTRIBUTIONS FROM
+  THE MUSEUM OF HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY:
+
+  PAPER 51
+
+
+
+
+  WOODWORKING TOOLS, 1600-1900
+
+  _Peter C. Welsh_
+
+
+  SPECIALIZATION        183
+
+  CONFIGURATION         194
+
+  CHANGE                214
+
+  BIBLIOGRAPHY          227
+
+  _Peter C Welsh_
+
+
+
+
+WOODWORKING TOOLS
+
+1600-1900
+
+
+     _This history of woodworking hand tools from the 17th to the 20th
+     century is one of a very gradual evolution of tools through
+     generations of craftsmen. As a result, the sources of changes in
+     design are almost impossible to ascertain. Published sources,
+     moreover, have been concerned primarily with the object shaped by
+     the tool rather than the tool itself. The resulting scarcity of
+     information is somewhat compensated for by collections in museums
+     and restorations._
+
+     _In this paper, the author spans three centuries in discussing the
+     specialization, configuration, and change of woodworking tools in
+     the United States._
+
+     THE AUTHOR: _Peter C. Welsh is curator, Growth of the United
+     States, in the Smithsonian Institution's Museum of History and
+     Technology._
+
+In 1918, PROFESSOR W.M.F. PETRIE concluded a brief article on "History
+in Tools" with a reminder that the history of this subject "has yet to
+be studied," and lamented the survival of so few precisely dated
+specimens. What Petrie found so discouraging in studying the implements
+of the ancient world has consistently plagued those concerned with tools
+of more recent vintage. Anonymity is the chief characteristic of hand
+tools of the last three centuries. The reasons are many: first, the tool
+is an object of daily use, subjected while in service to hard wear and,
+in some cases, ultimate destruction; second, a tool's usefulness is apt
+to continue through many years and through the hands of several
+generations of craftsmen, with the result that its origins become lost;
+third, the achievement of an implement of demonstrated proficiency
+dictated against radical, and therefore easily datable, changes in shape
+or style; and fourth, dated survivals needed to establish a range of
+firm control specimens for the better identification of unknowns,
+particularly the wooden elements of tools--handles, moldings, and plane
+bodies--are frustratingly few in non-arid archaeological sites. When
+tracing the provenance of American tools there is the additional problem
+of heterogeneous origins and shapes--that is, what was the appearance
+of a given tool prior to its standardization in England and the United
+States? The answer requires a brief summary of the origin of selected
+tool shapes, particularly those whose form was common to both the
+British Isles and the Continent in the 17th century. Beyond this, when
+did the shape of English tools begin to differ from the shape of tools
+of the Continent? Finally, what tool forms predominated in American
+usage and when, if in fact ever, did any of these tools achieve a
+distinctly American character? In the process of framing answers to
+these questions, one is confronted by a constantly diminishing
+literature, coupled with a steadily increasing number of tool types.[1]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 1.--1685: THE PRINCIPAL TOOLS that the carpenter
+needed to frame a house, as listed by JOHANN AMOS COMENIUS in his _Orbis
+Sensualium Pictus_ were the felling axe (4), wedge and beetle (7 and 8),
+chip axe (10), saw (12), trestle (14), and pulley (15). (Charles Hoole
+transl., London, 1685. _Courtesy of the Folger Shakespeare Library_.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 2.--1685: THE BOXMAKER AND TURNER as pictured by
+Comenius required planes (3 and 5), workbench (4), auger (6), knife (7),
+and lathe (14). (From Johann Amos Comenius, _Orbis Sensualium Pictus.
+Courtesy of the Folger Shakespeare Library_.)]
+
+The literature of the subject, both new and old, is sparse, with
+interest always centering upon the object shaped by the craftsman's tool
+rather than upon the tool itself. Henry Mercer's _Ancient Carpenters'
+Tools_, first published in 1929, is an exception. It remains a rich
+source of information based primarily on the marvelous collections
+preserved by the Bucks County Historical Society. Since 1933, the Early
+American Industries Association, both through collecting and through its
+_Chronicle_, has called attention to the vanishing trades, their tools
+and techniques; the magazine _Antiques_ has occasionally dealt with this
+subject. Historians of economic and industrial development usually
+neglect the tools of the woodcrafts, and when considering the
+toolmakers, they have reference only to the inventors and producers of
+machine tools. The dearth of written material is somewhat compensated
+for by the collections of hand tools in American museums and
+restorations, notably those at Williamsburg, Cooperstown, Old Sturbridge
+Village, Winterthur, the Henry Ford Museum, and Shelburne; at the latter
+in particular the extensive collection has been bolstered by Frank H.
+Wildung's museum pamphlet, "Woodworking Tools at Shelburne Museum."
+The most informative recent American work on the subject is Eric
+Sloane's handsomely illustrated _A Museum of Early American Tools_,
+published in 1964. Going beyond just the tools of the woodworker,
+Sloane's book also includes agricultural implements. It is a delightful
+combination of appreciation of early design, nostalgia, and useful fact.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 3.--1703: THE TOOLS OF THE JOINER illustrated by
+Moxon are the workbench (A), fore plane (B. 1), jointer (B. 2),
+strike-block (B. 3), smoothing plane (B. 4 and B. 7), rabbet plane (B.
+5), plow (B. 6), forming chisels (C. 1 and C. 3), paring chisel (C. 2),
+skew former (C. 4), mortising chisel (sec. C. 5), gouge (C. 6), square
+(D), bevel (F), gauge (G), brace and bit (H), gimlet (I), auger (K),
+hatchet (L), pit saw (M), whipsaw (N), frame saw (O), saw set (Q),
+handsaw (unmarked), and compass saw (E). (Joseph Moxon, _Mechanick
+Exercises_ ..., 3rd ed., London, 1703. Library of Congress.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 4.--1703: ONLY THE PRINCIPAL TOOLS used in
+carpentry are listed by Moxon: the axe (A), adz (B), socket chisel (C),
+ripping chisel (D), drawknife (E), hookpin (F), bevel (G), plumb line
+(H), hammer (I), commander (K), crow (L), and jack (M). (Moxon,
+_Mechanick Exercises_ ..., 1703. Library of Congress.)]
+
+Charles Hummel's forthcoming _With Hammer in Hand: The Dominy Craftsmen
+of East Hampton_--to be published by the Yale University Press--will be
+a major contribution to the literature dealing with Anglo-American
+woodworking tools. Hummel's book will place in perspective Winterthur
+Museum's uniquely documented Dominy Woodshop Collection. This extensive
+collection of tools--over a thousand in number--is rich in attributed
+and dated examples which range from the early 18th through the mid-19th
+century. The literature of the subject has been greatly enhanced by the
+English writer, W.L. Goodman. Extending a series of articles that first
+appeared in the _Journal of The Institute of Handicraft Teachers_,
+Goodman has put together a well-researched _History of Woodworking
+Tools_ (London, 1964), one particularly useful for its wealth of
+illustration from antiquity and the Middle Ages.
+
+
+Specialization
+
+Given the limitations of precise dating, uncertain provenance, and an
+uneven literature, what can be learned about woodworking tools after
+1600? In some instances, design change can be noted and documented to
+provide at least a general criteria for dating. Frequently, the original
+appearance of tools can be documented. For some hand tools,
+characteristics can be established that denote a national origin. Not
+infrequently a tool's style, decorative motif, or similarity to other
+objects that coexisted at a given time can suggest, even in relatively
+modern times, the values of the society that produced it. The source of
+such information derived from the hand tool is generally visual,
+recorded in the tool itself or in pictures of it and supported by
+manuscript and printed material.
+
+Survey the principal printed sources of the 17th, 18th, and 19th
+centuries. The first thing that is apparent is a remarkable
+proliferation of tool types without any significant change in the
+definition and description of the carpenter's or joiner's task. Begin in
+1685 with Charles Hoole's translation of Johann Amos Comenius' _Orbis
+Sensualium Pictus_ for use as a Latin grammar. Among the occupations
+chosen to illustrate vocabulary and usage were the carpenter (fig. 1),
+the boxmaker (cabinetmaker), and the turner (fig. 2). "The Carpenter,"
+according to Hoole's text, "squareth Timber with a Chip ax ... and
+saweth it with a Saw" while the more specialized "Box-maker, smootheth
+hewen-Boards with a Plain upon a Work-board, he maketh them very smooth
+with a little plain, he boarth them thorow with an Augre, carveth them
+with a Knife, fasteneth them together with Glew, and Cramp-irons, and
+maketh Tables, Boards, Chests &c." Hoole repeated Comenius' plates with
+the result that the craftsman's tools and his work have the same
+characteristic medieval flavor as the text.[2]
+
+Joseph Moxon in his well-quoted work on the mechanic arts defined
+joinery as "an Art Manual, whereby several Pieces of Wood are so fitted
+and join'd together by Straight-line, Squares, Miters or any Bevel, that
+they shall seem one intire Piece." Including the workbench, Moxon
+described and illustrated 30 tools (fig. 3) needed by the joiner. The
+carpenter's tools were less favored by illustration; only 13 were
+pictured (fig. 4). The tools that the carpenter used were the same as
+those of the joiner except that the carpenter's tools were structurally
+stronger. The axe serves as a good example of the difference. The
+joiner's axe was light and short handled with the left side of the
+cutting edge bezeled to accommodate one-handed use. The carpenter's axe,
+on the other hand, was intended "to hew great Stuff" and was made deeper
+and heavier to facilitate the squaring and beveling of timbers.[3] By
+mid-18th century the craft of joiner and carpenter had been completely
+rationalized in Diderot's _Encyclopédie_ and by André Roubo in his
+_L'Art du menuisier_, a part of Duhamel's _Descriptions des arts et
+métiers_. Diderot, for example, illustrates 14 bench planes alone,
+generally used by the joiner (fig. 5), while Roubo suggests the steady
+sophistication of the art in a plate showing the special planes and
+irons required for fine molding and paneling (fig. 6).
+
+[Illustration: Figure 5.--1769: THE BENCH PLANES OF THE JOINER increased
+in number, but in appearance they remained much the same as those
+illustrated by Moxon. (Denis Diderot, _Recueil de planches sur les
+science et les arts libéraux_, Paris, 1769, vol. 7, "Menuiserie."
+Smithsonian photo 56630.)]
+
+Despite such thoroughness, without the addition of the several plates it
+would be almost impossible to visualize, through the descriptive text
+alone, the work of the carpenter and joiner except, of course, in modern
+terms. This is particularly true of the numerous texts on building, such
+as Batty Langley's _The Builder's Complete Assistant_ (1738) and Francis
+Price's _The British Carpenter_ (1765), where building techniques are
+well described but illustration of tools is omitted. This inadequacy
+grows. In two 19th-century American editions of British works, _The Book
+of Trades_, printed at Philadelphia in 1807, and Hazen's _Panorama of
+the Professions and Trades_ (1838), the descriptions of the carpenter's
+trade are extremely elementary.
+
+Thomas Martin's _Circle of the Mechanical Arts_ (1813), although far
+more thorough than many texts, still defined carpentry "as the art of
+cutting out, framing, and joining large pieces of wood, to be used in
+building" and joinery as "small work" or what "is called by the French,
+_menuiserie_." Martin enumerated 16 tools most useful to the carpenter
+and 21 commonly used by the joiner; in summary, he noted, as had Moxon,
+that "both these arts are subservient to architecture, being employed in
+raising, roofing, flooring and ornamenting buildings of all kinds" (fig.
+7).[4]
+
+In Peter Nicholson's _The Mechanic's Companion_ (figs. 8, 9, and 10),
+the all-too-familiar definition of carpentry as "the art of employing
+timber in the construction of buildings" suggests very little of the
+carpenter's actual work or the improvement in tool design that had
+occurred since Moxon's _Exercises_. From Nicholson's list of the tools
+required by the carpenter--"a ripping saw, a hand saw, an axe, an adze,
+a socket chisel, a firmer chisel, a ripping chisel, an auguer, a gimlet,
+a hammer, a mallet, a pair of pincers, and sometimes planes"--there
+would seem at first glance slight advance since the 1600's. The
+enumeration of the joiner's tools, however, indicates a considerable
+proliferation, particularly when compared to earlier writers. By the
+early 19th century, the more refined work of joinery required over 50
+tools.
+
+     The bench planes [instructed Nicholson] are, the jack plane, the
+     fore plane, the trying plane, the long plane, the jointer, and the
+     smoothing plane; the cylindric plane, the compass and forkstaff
+     planes; the straight block, for straightening short edges. Rebating
+     planes are the moving fillister, the sash fillister, the common
+     rebating plane, the side rebating plane. Grooving planes are the
+     plough and dado grooving planes. Moulding planes are sinking
+     snipebills, side snipebills, beads, hollows and rounds, ovolos and
+     ogees. Boring tools are: gimlets, bradawls, stock, and bits.
+     Instruments for dividing the wood, are principally the ripping saw,
+     the half ripper, the hand saw, the panel saw, the tenon saw, the
+     carcase saw, the sash saw, the compass saw, the keyhole saw, and
+     turning saw. Tools used for forming the angles of two adjoining
+     surfaces, are squares and bevels. Tools used for drawing parallel
+     lines are gauges. Edge tools are the firmer chisel, the mortise
+     chisel, the socket chisel, the gouge, the hatchet, the adze, the
+     drawing knife. Tools for knocking upon wood and iron are, the
+     mallet and hammer. Implements for sharpening tools are the grinding
+     stone, the rub stone, and the oil or whet stone.[5]
+
+Reflecting what the text writers listed, toolmakers by the end of the
+18th century gave buyers a wide choice. The catalogue of Sheffield's
+Castle Hill Works offered 20 combinations of ready-stocked tool chests;
+the simplest contained 12 carpenter's tools and the most complex, 39,
+plus, if desired, an additional assortment of gardening implements (fig.
+11). In 1857, the Arrowmammett Works of Middletown, Connecticut,
+producers of bench and molding planes, published an illustrated
+catalogue that offered 34 distinct types that included everything from
+hollows and rounds to double jointers and hand-rail planes (fig.
+12).[6]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 6.--1774: ANDRÉ ROUBO'S _L'Art du menuisier_
+contains detailed plates and descriptions of the most specialized of
+woodworking planes: those used to cut panel moldings. The conformation
+of these tools was still distinctly in keeping with the Moxon type and
+suggests that, at least in Europe, no remarkable change had yet occurred
+in the shape of planes. (André-Jacob Roubo, _L'Art du menuisier_:
+Troisième partie, troisième section, l'art du menuisier ébéniste [Paris,
+1774]. Smithsonian photo 49790-D.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 7.--1813: THOMAS MARTIN ILLUSTRATED ON ONE PLATE
+the tools of the carpenter and joiner dividing them as follows: the
+tools most useful to the carpenter, the axe (7), adz (6), saw (24),
+socket chisel (13), firmer chisel (5), auger (1), gimlet (3), gauge
+(16), square (9), compass (36), hammer (21), mallet (22), hookpin (11),
+crow (12), plumb rule (18), and level (19); and the tools most often
+associated with joinery, the jack plane (30), trying plane (31),
+smoothing plane (34), tenon saw (25), compass saw (26), keyhole saw
+(27), square (8), bevel (23), gauge (17), mortise chisel (4), gouge
+(14), turnscrew (15), plow plane (29), molding plane (35), pincers (37),
+bradawl (10), stock and bit (2), sidehook (20), workbench (28), and rule
+(38). The planes are of particular interest since they show clearly a
+change in form from those previously illustrated. (Thomas Martin, _The
+Circle of the Mechanical Arts_, London, 1813.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 8.--1832: PETER NICHOLSON ILLUSTRATED an
+interesting mixture of old and new forms. An updating of Moxon,
+Nicholson's carpenter required an axe (1), adz (2), socket chisel (3),
+mortise and tenon gauge (4), square (5), plumb rule (6), level (7),
+auger (8), hookpin (9), and crow (10). (Peter Nicholson, _The Mechanic's
+Companion_. 1st American ed., Philadelphia, 1832. Smithsonian photo
+56633.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 9.--1832: THE WORKBENCH DELINEATED BY NICHOLSON
+was little improved over Moxon's, although the planes--jack (1), trying
+plane (2), smoothing plane (3), sash fillister (7), and plow
+(8)--followed the form seen in Martin (fig. 7). The inception of this
+shape occurred in the shops of Sheffield toolmakers in the last half of
+the 18th century, and it persisted until replaced by metallic versions
+patented by American innovators during the last quarter of the 19th
+century. (Nicholson, _The Mechanic's Companion_. Smithsonian photo
+56631.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 10.--1832: THE BRACE AND BIT, GIMLET, CHISELS, AND
+SAWS, having achieved a standard form distinctly different than those of
+Moxon's vintage, were, like the plane, slow to change. The metallic
+version of the brace did not replace the standard Sheffield type (1) in
+the United States until after 1850. For all intent and purpose the saw
+still retains the characteristics illustrated in Nicholson. Of interest
+is Nicholson's comment regarding the saws; namely, that the double
+handle was peculiar to the hand (6) and tenon saws (7), while the
+compass (9) and the sash saws (8) had the single handle. In addition the
+tenon saw was generally backed in iron and the sash saw in brass.
+(Nicholson, _The Mechanic's Companion_. Smithsonian photo 56632.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 11.--EARLY 19TH CENTURY: THE ADVERTISEMENTS OF
+TOOLMAKERS indicated the diversity of production. The Castle Hill Works
+at Sheffield offered to gentlemen 20 choices of tool chests designed to
+appeal to a wide variety of users and purses. The chest was available in
+either oak or mahogany, depending on the gentleman's tastes (fig. 49).
+(Book 87, Cutler and Company, Castle Hill Works, Sheffield. _Courtesy of
+the Victoria and Albert Museum_.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 12.--1857: THE DIVERSITY OF TOOLS available to
+buyers made necessary the illustrated trade catalogue. Although few in
+number in the United States before 1850, tool catalogues became
+voluminous in the last half of the century as printing costs dropped.
+(Smithsonian Institution Library. Smithsonian photo 49790.)]
+
+American inventories reflect the great increase suggested by the early
+technical writers and trade catalogues cited above. Compare the content
+of two American carpenters' shops--one of 1709, in York County,
+Virginia, and the other of 1827, in Middleborough, Massachusetts. John
+Crost, a Virginian, owned, in addition to sundry shoemaking and
+agricultural implements, a dozen gimlets, chalklines, bung augers, a
+dozen turning tools and mortising chisels, several dozen planes (ogees,
+hollows and rounds, and plows), several augers, a pair of 2-foot rules,
+a spoke shave, lathing hammers, a lock saw, three files, compasses,
+paring chisels, a jointer's hammer, three handsaws, filling axes, a
+broad axe, and two adzes. Nearly 120 years later Amasa Thompson listed
+his tools and their value. Thompson's list is a splendid comparison of
+the tools needed in actual practice, as opposed to the tools suggested
+by Nicholson in his treatise on carpentry or those shown in the
+catalogues of the toolmakers.[7] Thompson listed the following:
+
+  1 set bench planes                       $6.00
+
+  1 Broad Axe                               3.00
+
+  1 Adze                                    2.25
+
+  1 Panel saw                               1.50
+
+  1 Panel saw                               1.58
+
+  1 fine do--                               1.58
+
+  1 Drawing knife                            .46
+
+  1 Trying square                            .93
+
+  1 Shingling hatchet                        .50
+
+  1 Hammer                                   .50
+
+  1 Rabbit plane                             .83
+
+  1 Halving do                               .50
+
+  1 Backed fine saw                         1.25
+
+  1 Inch augre                               .50
+
+  1 pr. dividers or compasses--              .71
+
+  1 Panel saw for splitting                 2.75
+
+  1 Tennon gauge                            1.42
+
+  1 Bevel                                    .84
+
+  1 Bradd Hammer                             .50
+
+  1 _Architect Book_                        6.50
+
+  1 Case Mathematical Instruments       3.62-1/2
+
+  1 Panel saw                               2.75
+
+  1 Grafting saw                            1.00
+
+  1 Bench screw                             1.00
+
+  1 Stamp                                   2.50
+
+  1 Double joint rule                    .62-1/2
+
+  1 Sash saw                            1.12-1/2
+
+  1 Oil Can                                  .17
+
+  1 Brace & 36 straw cold bits              9.00
+
+  1 Window Frame tool                       4.00
+
+  1 Blind tool                              1.33
+
+  1 Glue Kettle                          .62-1/2
+
+  1 Grindstone without crank                1.75
+
+  1 Machine for whetting saws                .75
+
+  1 Tennoning machine                       4.50
+
+  Drafting board and square Bevel--         1.25
+
+  1 Noseing sash plane with templets & copes  4.50
+
+  1 pr. clamps for clamping doors           2.17
+
+  1 Set Bench Planes--double irons.--       7.50
+
+  1 Grindstone 300 lbs @                    6.25
+
+  1 Stove for shop--$7.25, one elbow .37 & 40
+  lbs second hand pipe $4.00               11.62
+
+  1 Bed moulding                            2.00
+
+  1 Pr. shears for cutting tin.--            .17
+
+  1 Morticing Machine                      10.75
+
+  1 Grecian Ovilo                           1.13
+
+  1-3/16 beed                                .67
+
+  1 Spirit level                            2.25
+
+  1 Oil stone                                .42
+
+  1 Small trying square                      .48
+
+  1 pareing chisel                           .37
+
+  1 Screw driver                             .29
+
+  1 Bench screw                              .75
+
+  1 Box rule                                 .50
+
+  1-3/4 Augre                                .41
+
+  11 Gouges                                 1.19
+
+  13 Chisels                                1.17
+
+  1 small iron vice                          .52
+
+  1 pr. Hollow Rounds                        .86
+
+  4 Framing chisels                         1.05
+
+  1 Grove plough & Irons--Sold at 4.50      5.00
+
+  1 Sash plane for 1-1/4 stuff              1.50
+
+  1 Copeing plane                            .67
+
+  1 Bead 1/4--                               .75
+
+  1 Bead 3/4                                1.00
+
+  1 Rabbit (Sold at .92)                     .92
+
+  1 Smooth plane                            1.50
+
+  1 Strike Block                             .92
+
+  1 Compass saw                              .42
+
+  6 Gauges                                  1.83
+
+  1 Dust brush                               .25
+
+  1 Rasp, or wood file                       .25
+
+  1 Augre 2 in.                              .76
+
+  1 Augre 1 in.                              .40
+
+  1 Do 3/4                                   .30
+
+  1 Spoke shave                              .50
+
+  1 Bevel--                                  .25
+
+  1 Box rule                                 .84
+
+  1 Iron square                             1.42
+
+  1 Box rule                                1.25
+
+  1 Spur Rabbit (Sold--1.17)                1.33
+
+  1 Pannel plane                            1.25
+
+  1 Sash plane                              1.25
+
+  1 pr. Match planes                        2.25
+
+  1 Two inch chisel or firmer--              .42
+
+  1 Morticing chisel 3/8                     .25
+
+  1 Large screw driver                      1.00
+
+  1 Pr. small clamps                         .50
+
+  1 pr. Spring dividers                      .92
+
+  1 do-nippers                               .20
+
+  1 Morticing chisel 1/2 in.                 .28
+
+  1 Ovilo & Ostrigal 3/4--                  1.25
+
+  1 Scotia & Ostrigal 5/8--                 1.08
+
+  1 Noseing--                               1.08
+
+  1 Pr. Hollow & rounds                     1.33
+
+  1 Ogee-- 1/2 inch                         1.00
+
+  1 Ostrigal 7/8 inch                       1.00
+
+  1 Bit--                                    .15
+
+  1 Beed 1/2 inch                            .83
+
+  1 Claw hammer                              .67
+
+  1 Fillister                               2.50
+
+  2 Beeds at 5/8                            1.83
+
+  1 Pair Quirk tools                        1.50
+
+  1 Side Rabbit plane                        .83
+
+  1 Large steel tongued sq.                 1.71
+
+  1 Saw & Pad                                .67
+
+  1 pr. fire stones                          .50
+
+  1 small trying sq.                         .50
+
+  1 Set Bench planes double ironed without
+      smooth plane                          6.00
+
+  1 Bench screw                              .75
+
+[Illustration: Figure 13.--EARLY 18TH CENTURY: In addition to their
+special function and importance as survivals documenting an outmoded
+technology, the hand tool often combines a gracefulness of line and a
+sense of proportion that makes it an object of great decorative appeal.
+The dividers of the builder or shipwright illustrated here are of French
+origin and may be valued as much for their cultural significance as for
+their technical importance. (Smithsonian photo 49792-G.)]
+
+By 1900, the carpenter's tool chest, fully stocked and fit for the
+finest craftsman, contained 90 or more tools. Specialization is readily
+apparent; the change in, and achievement of, the ultimate design of a
+specific tool is not so easily pinpointed. Only by comparing
+illustrations and surviving examples can such an evolution be
+appreciated and in the process, whether pondering the metamorphosis of a
+plane, a brace and bit, or an auger, the various stages of change
+encountered coincide with the rise of modern industrial society.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 14.--1688: FRONTISPIECE FROM JOHN BROWN, _The
+Description and Use of the Carpenter's Rule_, London, 1688. (Library of
+Congress.)]
+
+
+Configuration
+
+Hand tools are often neglected in the search for the pleasing objects of
+the past. Considered too utilitarian, their decorative appeal--the
+mellow patina of the wood plane or the delicately tapered legs of a pair
+of dividers--often goes unnoticed. Surprisingly modern in design, the
+ancient carpenter's or cabinetmaker's tool has a vitality of line that
+can, without reference to technical significance, make it an object of
+considerable grace and beauty. The hand tool is frequently a lively and
+decorative symbol of a society at a given time--a symbol, which,
+according to the judges at London's Crystal Palace Exhibition in 1851,
+gives "indications of the peculiar condition and habits of the people
+whence they come, of their social and industrial wants and aims, as well
+as their natural or acquired advantages."[8] The hand tool, therefore,
+should be considered both as an object of appealing shape and a document
+illustrative of society and its progress.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 15.--18TH CENTURY: Cabinetmaker's dividers of
+English origin. (Private collection. Smithsonian photo 49789-B.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 16.--1783: CABINETMAKER'S dividers of English
+manufacture, dated, and marked T. Pearmain. See detail, figure 17.
+(Smithsonian photo 49792-C.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 17.--1783: DETAIL OF CABINETMAKER'S DIVIDERS
+showing name and date.]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 18.--18TH CENTURY: Carpenter's dividers of English
+origin, undated. (Smithsonian photo 49792-B.)]
+
+On first sight, it is the conformation rather than any facet of its
+technical or social significance that strikes the eye; perhaps the most
+decorative of tools are early dividers and calipers which, prior to
+their standardization, existed in seemingly endless variety. The great
+dividers used by the shipbuilder and architect for scribing and
+measuring timbers not only indicate building techniques (accession
+61.548) but also document 17th-and early 18th-century decorative
+metalwork, as seen in figure 13. Well before the 17th century, artists
+and engravers recognized them as intriguing shapes to include in any
+potpourri of instruments, either in cartouches or the frontispieces of
+books (fig. 14).
+
+[Illustration: Figure 19.--1855: THE FRONTISPIECE FROM EDWARD SHAW, _The
+Modern Architect_ (Boston, 1855), shows the carpenter's dividers in the
+foreground unchanged in form from those illustrated in figure 18. Of
+further interest in Shaw's plate is the dress of the workmen and the
+balloon frame of the house under construction. (Smithsonian photo
+49792-A.)]
+
+The two pairs of cabinetmaker's dividers illustrated in figures 15 and
+16 suggest significant changes in the design of a basic tool. The
+dividers shown in figure 15 are English and would seem to be of early
+18th-century origin, perhaps even earlier. They are Renaissance in
+feeling with decorated legs and a heart-shaped stop on the end of the
+slide-arm. In character, they are like the great dividers shown in
+figure 13: functional, but at the same time preserving in their
+decoration the features common to a wide variety of ironwork and wares
+beyond the realm of tools alone. The dividers pictured in figure 16 are
+a decided contrast. Dated 1783, they are strongly suggestive of
+Sheffield origin. Gone is the superfluous decoration; in its place is
+the strong, crisp line of a tool that has reached nearly the ultimate of
+function and manufacture, a device which both in general appearance and
+precise design is very modern in execution. Equally intriguing are the
+smaller, more slender dividers (accession 319557) of the 18th-century
+house-builder as seen in figure 18, a form that changed very little, if
+at all, until after 1850--a fact confirmed by the frontispiece of Edward
+Shaw's _The Modern Architect_, published in Boston in 1855 (fig. 19).
+The double calipers of the woodturner (fig. 20) have by far the most
+appealing and ingenious design of all such devices. Designed for
+convenience, few tools illustrate better the aesthetic of the purely
+functional than this pair of 19th-century American calipers.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 20.--EARLY 19TH CENTURY: THE DOUBLE CALIPERS of
+the woodturner permitted double readings to be taken without changing
+the set of the tool. Inherent in this practical design is a gracefulness
+of line seldom surpassed. (Private collection. Smithsonian photo
+49793-C.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 21.--1704: THE FLOOR PLANE OR LONG JOINER of
+Norwegian origin exhibits the characteristic decoration of the stock and
+mouth, patterns common on tools of northern European and Scandinavian
+origin. (_Courtesy of the Norsk Folkemuseum, Oslo, Norway._)]
+
+Intended to establish proportion and to insure precision, it seems a
+natural consequence that dividers and calipers should in themselves
+reflect the same sense of balance and grace that they were designed to
+govern. Still, even the most prosaic examples of woodworking tools,
+completely divorced from the quasi-mathematical devices of measure and
+proportion, have this quality and can be admired solely as decorative
+objects. This is most evident in the three European bench planes
+illustrated in figures 21, 22, and 23: one Norwegian, dated 1704; one
+Dutch (accession 319562), dated 1756; and one German, dated 1809. The
+Norwegian and German examples, with their elaborately carved bodies and
+heart-shaped mouths, are typical of the type that Swedish and German
+colonists in America might have used in the 17th and 18th centuries.
+They are important for that reason. Also, all three exhibit elaboration
+found on other material survivals from these countries in their
+respective periods. For example, the incised rosette of the Dutch plane
+(fig. 22) is especially suggestive of the rosettes found on English and
+American furniture of the 1750's and 1760's, specifically on high
+chests.
+
+The decorative motifs that characterized European tools of the 17th and
+18th centuries obscured technical improvement. By contrast, in England
+and America, tools gained distinction through the directness of their
+design. Following English patterns, tools of American make were
+straightforward. Only later, in new tool types, did they imitate the
+rococo flourish of their European predecessors. In America, as in
+England, the baroque for things functional seemingly had little appeal.
+This is particularly true of woodworking planes on which, unlike their
+continental cousins, embellishment is rarely seen. Exemplifying this
+tradition are three early 19th-century American planes: a plow, for
+cutting channels of various widths on board edges, marked "G. White,
+Philda" (fig. 24); a rabbet, for notching the margin of boards; made
+by E.W. Carpenter of Lancaster, Pennsylvania (fig. 25); and a jack or
+foreplane, for rough surfacing (accession 61.547), made by A. Klock and
+dated 1818 as seen in figure 26.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 22.--1756: THE HIGHLY elaborated stock and
+rosette-incised wedge of the smoothing plane recall the decoration on
+furniture of the period. The plane is of Dutch origin. (Smithsonian
+photo 49792-F.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 23.--1809: THIS BENCH PLANE of German origin is
+dated 1809. It is of a traditional form that persists to the present
+day. The planes pictured in figures 21, 22, and 23 are similar to the
+type brought to North America by non-English colonists. (Private
+collection. Smithsonian photo 49793-F.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 24.--ABOUT 1818: This plow plane, used to cut
+narrow channels on the edges of boards, was made by G. White of
+Philadelphia in the early 19th century. It is essentially the same tool
+depicted in the catalogues of Sheffield manufactures and in the plates
+from Martin and Nicholson. The pattern of the basic bench tools used in
+America consistently followed British design, at least until the last
+quarter of the 19th century. (Private collection. Smithsonian photo
+49794-E.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 25. 1830-1840: THE DESIGN OF the rabbet plane,
+used to cut a groove of fixed width and depth on the edge of a board,
+was not improved upon in the 19th century. The carpenter's dependence on
+this tool lessened only after the perfection of multipurpose metallic
+planes that could be readily converted to cut a "rabbet." (Private
+collection. Smithsonian photo 494789-H).]
+
+The question of dating arises, since only the Klock piece is firmly
+fixed. How, for example, is the early 19th-century attribution arrived
+at for the planes inscribed White and Carpenter? First, the nature of
+the stamped name "G. White" is of proper character for the period.
+Second, G. White is listed in the Philadelphia city directories as a
+"plane-maker" between the years 1818 and 1820, working at the back of 5
+Filbert Street and later at 34 Juliana Street. Third, internal evidence
+on the plane itself gives a clue. In this case, the hardware--rivets and
+furrels--is similar if not identical to that found on firearms of the
+period, weapons whose dates of manufacture are known. The decorative
+molding on the fence of this plane is proper for the period; this is not
+a reliable guide, however, since similar moldings are retained
+throughout the century. Finally, the plane is equipped with a fence
+controlled by slide-arms, fixed with wedges and not by adjustable screw
+arms. After 1830, tools of high quality, such as White's, invariably
+have the screw arms. The rabbet plane, made by Carpenter, is traceable
+via another route, the U.S. Patent Office records. Carpenter,
+self-designated "toolmaker of Lancaster," submitted patents for the
+improvement of wood planes between 1831 and 1849. Examples of
+Carpenter's work, always stamped as shown in figure 27, survive, both
+dated and undated. There are several of his planes in the collections of
+the Bucks County Historical Society, and dated pieces are known in
+private collections.
+
+Inherent in the bench planes is a feeling of motion, particularly in the
+plow and the rabbet where basic design alone conveys the idea that they
+were meant to move over fixed surfaces. Of the three examples, only the
+brass tippings and setscrew of the plow plane suggest any enrichment,
+and of course these were not intended for decoration; in later years,
+however, boxwood, fruitwood, and even ivory tips were added to the more
+expensive factory models. Also unintentional, but pleasing, is the
+distinctive throat of the rabbet plane--a design that developed to
+permit easy discharge of shavings, and one that mass manufacture did
+not destroy.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 26.--1818: THE JACK PLANE, used first by the
+carpenter for rapid surfacing, is distinguished primarily by the bezeled
+and slightly convex edge of its cutting iron. As with the plow and the
+rabbet, its shape is ubiquitous. Dated and marked A. Klock, this
+American example follows precisely those detailed in Sheffield pattern
+books. (Smithsonian photo 49794-C.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 27.--1830-1840: DETAIL OF the rabbet plane (fig.
+25) showing the characteristic stamp of E.W. Carpenter. (Smithsonian
+photo 49794-D.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 28.--ABOUT 1631: THE PRECEDING ILLUSTRATIONS
+emphasize the divergent appearance of European and Anglo-American tools.
+This, however, was not always the case. The woodworker's shop by the
+Dutch engraver Jan Van Vliet suggests the similarity between English and
+European tool types in the 17th century. Note in particular the planes,
+axe, brace, and auger as compared to Moxon. (Library of Congress,
+Division of Prints and Photographs.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 29.--1690: THE CABINETMAKER'S SHOP from Elias
+Pozelius, _Orbus Pictus nach Zeichnugen der Susanna Maria_ _Sandrart_,
+Nürnberg, 1690. (Library of Congress.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 30.--1568: THE WOODWORKER'S SHOP from Hans Sachs,
+_Eygentliche Beschrerbung Aller Stande ... mit Kunstreichen Figuren_ [by
+Jost Amman], Frankfurt, 1568. (Library of Congress.)]
+
+The divergence from European to an Anglo-American hand-tool design and
+the approximate date that it occurred can be suggested by a comparison
+of contemporary illustrations. The change in the wooden bench plane can
+be followed from the early 17th century through its standardization at
+the end of the 18th century. Examine first the planes as drawn in the
+1630's by the Dutchman Jan Van Vliet (fig. 28), an etcher of Rembrandt's
+school at Leiden, and also the examples illustrated by Porzelius (fig.
+29) and by Jost Amman (fig. 30). Compare them to Moxon's plate (fig. 31)
+from the _Mechanick Exercises_ (3rd ed., 1703) and to the splendid
+drawing of the bench plane from André-Jacob Roubo's _L'Art du
+menuisier_, published in 1769 (fig. 32). In all of them, the rounded
+handle, or tote, and the fore-horn appear, characteristics of both
+European and English planes of the period before 1750. The similarity
+ends with the mass production of hand tools from the shops of the
+English toolmaking centers, principally Sheffield. An illustration from
+a pattern and design book of the Castle Hill Works, Sheffield, dating
+from the last quarter of the 18th century (fig. 33), shows the achieved,
+familiar form of the bench planes, as well as other tools. The use of
+this form in America is readily documented in Lewis Miller's
+self-portrait while working at his trade in York, Pennsylvania, in 1810
+(fig. 34) and by the shop sign carved by Isaac Fowle in 1820 for John
+Bradford (fig. 35). In each example, the bench plane clearly follows the
+English prototype.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 31.--1703: DETAIL OF THE BENCH PLANES from Moxon's
+_Mechanick Exercises_.]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 32.--1769: ANDRÉ-JACOB ROUBO'S PRECISE RENDERING
+of the bench plane retains the essential features shown by Moxon--the
+rounded tote or handle and the curved fore-horn. (André-Jacob Roubo,
+_L'Art du menuisier_, 1769.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 33.--EARLY 19TH CENTURY: The bench plane
+illustrated in Roubo or Moxon is seldom seen in American tool
+collections. The bench planes, smoothing planes, rabbets, and plows
+universally resemble those shown in this illustration from the pattern
+book of the Castle Hill Works, Sheffield. (Book 87, Cutler and Company,
+Castle Hill Works, Sheffield. _Courtesy of the Victoria and Albert
+Museum._)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 34.--ABOUT 1810: LEWIS MILLER WORKING AT HIS BENCH
+in York, Pa. In a predominantly Pennsylvania-German settlement, the
+plane used by Miller conforms to the Sheffield type illustrated in the
+catalogue of the Castle Hill Works as shown in figure 33. (York County
+Historical Society, York, Pa.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 35.--1820: JOHN BRADFORD'S shop sign carved by
+Isaac Fowle is a unique documentary of early 19th-century tool shapes
+and is in the Bostonian Society, Boston, Mass. (Index of American
+Design, The National Gallery, Washington, D.C.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 36.--1703: THE JOINER'S brace and bit--a detail
+from Moxon, _Mechanick Exercises_ ..., London, 1703. (Library of
+Congress, Smithsonian photo 56635.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 37.--1769: ROUBO'S ILLUSTRATION OF THE BRACE and
+bit differs from Moxon's only in the precision of the delineation.
+Contrast this form with that of the standard Sheffield version in figure
+38 and the metallic braces illustrated in figures 40 through 44. From
+these plates can be seen the progression of the bitstock toward its
+ultimate perfection in the late 19th century. (André-Jacob Roubo, _L'Art
+du menuisier_, 1769.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 38.--EARLY 19TH CENTURY: THE MASS-PRODUCED VERSION
+of the wooden brace and bit took the form illustrated in Book 87 of
+Cutler's Castle Hill Works. (_Courtesy of the Victoria and Albert
+Museum._)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 39.--18TH CENTURY: THE TRANSITIONAL FORM of the
+wooden brace and bit incorporated the overall shape of the mass-produced
+version but retained the archaic method of fastening the bit to the
+chuck. The tool is of Dutch origin and suggests the influence of
+Sheffield design on European tools. (Smithsonian photo 49792-E.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 40.--1769: ROUBO ILLUSTRATED THE METALLIC BRACE
+and, in addition, suggested its use as a screwdriver. (André-Jacob
+Roubo, _L'Art du menuisier_,1769.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 41.--ABOUT 1775: FORD, WHITMORE AND BRUNTON made
+and sold clockmaker's braces of metal with a sweep and shank that was
+imitated by American patentees in the 19th century. (Catalogue of Ford,
+Whitmore and Brunton, Birmingham, England. _Courtesy of the Birmingham
+Reference Library._)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 42.--1852: NEARLY ONE HUNDRED YEARS after Roubo's
+plate appeared, Jacob Switzer applied for a patent for an "Improved Self
+Holding Screw Driver." The similarity of Switzer's drawing and Roubo's
+plate is striking. (Original patent drawing 9,457, U.S. Patent Office,
+Record Group 241, the National Archives.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 43.--1866: THE SIMPLICITY AND STRENGTH of the
+brace proposed by J. Parker Gordon is in sharp contrast to the heavily
+splinted sides of the wooden brace commonly used in mid-19th-century
+America. (Original patent drawing 52,042, U.S. Patent Office, Record
+Group 241, the National Archives.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 44.--1865: MILTON NOBLES' PATENT perfecting the
+chuck which held the auger bit was an important step along the path
+which led ultimately to the complete acceptance of the metallic brace.
+Barber's ratchet brace shown in figure 66 completes the metamorphosis of
+this tool form in the United States. (Original patent drawing 51,660,
+U.S. Patent Office, Record Group 241, the National Archives.)]
+
+The carpenter's brace is another instance of divergent design after a
+common origin. Refer again to Van Vliet's etching of the woodworker's
+shop (fig. 28), to the detail from Moxon (fig. 36), and from Roubo (fig.
+37). All show the brace in a form familiar since the Middle Ages, a
+shape common to both delineators and craftsmen of the Continent and the
+British Isles. But, as the plane changed, so changed the brace. The
+standard form of this tool as it was used and produced in the United
+States in the 19th century can be seen in another plate from the
+catalogue of the Castle Hill Works at Sheffield (fig. 38). This English
+influence on American tool design is no surprise, since as early as 1634
+William Wood in _New England's Prospect_ suggested that colonists take
+to the New World "All manner of Ironwares, as all manner of nailes for
+houses ... with Axes both broad and pitching ... All manners of Augers,
+piercing bits, Whip-saws, Two handed saws, Froes ..., rings for Bettle
+heads, and Iron-wedges."
+
+[Illustration: Figure 45.--19TH CENTURY: THE UPHOLSTERER'S HAMMER is an
+unknown; it is not dated, its maker is anonymous, as is its user. It is
+of American origin, yet of a style that might have been used in England
+or on the Continent. This lack of provenance need not detract from its
+significance as a material survival. This hammer, the brace (fig. 46),
+the bevel (fig. 47), and the compass saw (fig. 48) are sufficiently
+provocative in their design to conjure some image of a technology
+dependent upon the skilled hand of craftsmen working in wood and of the
+relationship between the hand, the tool, and the finished product.
+(Smithsonian photo 49793-A.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 46.--18TH CENTURY: THE BRACE AND BIT in its
+nonfactory form conforms to a general design pattern in which none of
+the components are ever precisely alike. This aspect of variety of
+detail--sophistication, crudeness, decorative qualities or the
+like--reflects something of the individuality of the toolmaker, a
+quality completely lost in the standardization of the carpenter's brace.
+(Smithsonian photo 49794-A.)]
+
+English tool design in the 18th century also influenced the continental
+toolmakers. This can be seen in figure 39 in a transitional-type
+bitstock (accession 319556) from the Low Countries. Adopting an English
+shape, but still preserving the ancient lever device for holding the bit
+in place, the piece with its grapevine embellishment is a marked
+contrast to the severely functional brass chucks on braces of English
+manufacture. No less a contrast are metallic versions of the brace.
+These begin to appear with some regularity in the U.S. patent
+specifications of the 1840's; their design is apparently derived from
+18th-century precedents. Roubo (fig. 40) illustrated a metal bitstock in
+1769, as did Ford, Whitmore & Brunton, makers of jewelers' and
+watchmakers' tools, of Birmingham, England, in their trade catalogue of
+1775 (fig. 41). Each suggests a prototype of the patented forms of the
+1840's. For example, in 1852, Jacob Switzer of Basil, Ohio, suggested,
+as had Roubo a hundred years earlier, that the bitstock be used as a
+screwdriver (fig. 42); but far more interesting than Switzer's idea was
+his delineation of the brace itself, which he described as "an ordinary
+brace and bit stock" (U.S. pat. 9,457). The inference is that such a
+tool form was already a familiar one among the woodworking trades in the
+United States. Disregarding the screwdriver attachment, which is not
+without merit, Switzer's stock represents an accurate rendering of what
+was then a well-known form if not as yet a rival of the older wooden
+brace. Likewise, J. Parker Gordon's patent 52,042 of 1866 exemplifies
+the strengthening of a basic tool by the use of iron (fig. 43) and, as a
+result, the achievement of an even greater functionalism in design. The
+complete break with the medieval, however, is seen in a drawing
+submitted to the Commissioner of Patents in 1865 (pat. 51,660) by Milton
+V. Nobles of Rochester, New York.[9] Nobles' creation was of thoroughly
+modern design and appearance in which, unlike earlier types, the bit was
+held in place by a solid socket, split sleeve, and a tightening ring
+(fig. 44). In three centuries, three distinct design changes occurred in
+the carpenter's brace. First, about 1750, the so-called English or
+Sheffield bitstock appeared. This was followed in the very early 19th
+century by the reinforced English type whose sides were splinted by
+brass strips. Not only had the medieval form largely disappeared by the
+end of the 18th century, but so had the ancient lever-wedge method of
+fastening the bit in the stock, a device replaced by the pressure-spring
+button on the side of the chuck. Finally, in this evolution, came the
+metallic stock, not widely used in America until after the Civil War,
+that embodied in its design the influence of mass manufacture and in its
+several early versions all of the features of the modern brace and bit.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 47.--18TH CENTURY: The visually pleasing qualities
+of walnut and brass provide a level of response to this joiner's bevel
+quite apart from its technical significance. (Private collection.
+Smithsonian photo 49793-B.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 48.--18TH CENTURY: THE HANDLE OF THE COMPASS SAW,
+characteristically Dutch in shape, is an outstanding example of a
+recurring functional design, one which varied according to the hand of
+the sawer. (Smithsonian photo 49789-C.)]
+
+Henry Ward Beecher, impressed by the growing sophistication of the
+toolmakers, described the hand tool in a most realistic and objective
+manner as an "extension of a man's hand." The antiquarian, attuned to
+more subjective and romantic appraisals, will find this hardly
+sufficient. Look at the upholsterer's hammer (accession 61.35) seen in
+figure 45: there is no question that it is a response to a demanding
+task that required an efficient and not too forceful extension of the
+workman's hand. But there is another response to this implement: namely,
+the admiration for an unknown toolmaker who combined in an elementary
+striking tool a hammerhead of well-weighted proportion to be wielded
+gently through the medium of an extremely delicate handle. In short,
+here is an object about whose provenance one need know very little in
+order to enjoy it aesthetically. In a like manner, the 18th-century
+bitstock of Flemish origin (fig. 46), the English cabinetmaker's bevel
+of the same century (fig. 47), and the compass saw (accession 61.52,
+fig. 48) capture in their basic design something beyond the functional
+extension of the craftsman's hand. The slow curve of the bitstock, never
+identical from one early example to another, is lost in later
+factory-made versions; so too, with the coming of cheap steel, does the
+combination of wood (walnut) and brass used in the cabinetmaker's bevel
+slowly disappear; and, finally, in the custom-fitted pistol-like grip of
+the saw, there is an identity, in feeling at least, between craftsman
+and tool never quite achieved in later mass-produced versions.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 49.--EARLY 19TH CENTURY: THE DESIGNATION
+"GENTLEMAN'S TOOL CHEST" required a chest of "high-style" but
+necessitated no change in the tools it held. (Book 87, Cutler and
+Company, Castle Hill Works, Sheffield. _Courtesy of the Victoria and
+Albert Museum_.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 50.--19TH CENTURY: THE SCREWDRIVER, which began to
+appear regularly on the woodworker's bench after 1800, did not share the
+long evolution and tradition of other Anglo-American tool designs. The
+screwdriver in its early versions frequently had a scalloped blade for
+no other purpose than decoration. (Smithsonian photo 49794.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 51.--1870: THE USE of a new material prompted a
+departure from the traditional in shape and encouraged surface
+elaboration. The tendency, however, was short lived and the
+mass-produced metallic plane rapidly achieved a purity of design as
+pleasing as its wooden predecessors. (Private collection. Smithsonian
+photo 49789.)]
+
+Occasionally, ruling taste is reflected in the design of the carpenter's
+equipment. Notable is the "gentleman's tool chest" (fig. 49) advertised
+in the pattern book of the Castle Hill Works. The bracket feet, brass
+pulls, and inlaid keyholes imitate the style of the domestic chest of
+drawers of the period 1790 to 1810--undoubtedly, features included by
+the manufacturer to appeal to a gentleman of refined taste. In contrast
+to this Sheffield product is the plate from Shaw's _The Modern
+Architect_. The concept of the builder-carpenter as a gentleman still
+prevails, although the idea in this American scene is conveyed in the
+mid-19th century through fashionable dress. The tools and in particular
+the tool chest reflect only the severest of functional lines (fig. 19,
+p. 196).
+
+In deference to ruling taste, some tools lost for a time the clean lines
+that had long distinguished them. The screwdriver, simple in shape
+(accession 61.46) but in little demand until the 1840's, occasionally
+became most elaborate in its factory-made form (fig. 50) and departed
+noticeably from the unadorned style of traditional English and American
+tools. The scalloped blade, influenced by the rival styles rather than a
+technical need, seemed little related to the purpose of the tool.[10]
+No less archaic in decoration was the iron-bodied version of the plow
+plane (fig. 51). The Anglo-American tradition seems completely put
+aside. In its place is a most functional object, but one elaborately
+covered with a shell and vine motif! Patented in 1870 by Charles Miller
+and manufactured by the Stanley Rule and Level Company, this tool in its
+unadorned version is of a type that was much admired by the British
+experts at Philadelphia's Centennial Exhibition in 1876. What prompted
+such superfluous decoration on the plow plane? Perhaps it was to appeal
+to the flood of newly arrived American craftsmen who might find in the
+rococo something reminiscent of the older tools they had known in
+Europe. Perhaps it was simply the transference to the tool itself of the
+decorative work then demanded of the wood craftsmen. Or was it mainly a
+compulsion to dress, with little effort, a lackluster material that
+seemed stark and cold to Victorians accustomed to the ornateness being
+achieved elsewhere with the jigsaw and wood? Whatever the cause, the
+result did not persist long as a guide to hand-tool design. Instead, the
+strong, plain lines that had evolved over two centuries won universal
+endorsement at the Centennial Exhibition. The prize tools reflected
+little of the ornateness apparent in the wares of most of the other
+exhibitors. American makers of edge tools exhibiting at the Centennial
+showed the world not only examples of quality but of attractiveness as
+well.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 52.--19TH CENTURY: THE AMERICAN AXE WAS UNEXCELLED
+in design and ease of use. European observers praised it as distinctly
+American. At the Centennial Exhibition in 1876 Collins and Company of
+New York City was singled out as one of the outstanding manufacturers
+exhibiting these axes, a reputation that persisted. (_Tools for all
+Trades_, Hammacher, Schlemmer and Company, New York, 1896. Smithsonian
+photo 56625.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 53.--1876: DISSTON AND SONS LONG CONTINUED to
+remind prospective buyers of the company's success at the Philadelphia
+Centennial Exhibition by retaining the "Centennial Saw, No. 76" as a
+brand name. (_Illustrated Catalogue_, Baldwin, Robbins and Company,
+Boston, 1894. Smithsonian photo 56627.)]
+
+
+Change
+
+American hand tools in 1876 did not achieve the popular acclaim accorded
+the Corliss engine, yet few products shown by American exhibitors were
+more highly praised by foreign experts. It seems justified to suggest
+that American edge tools displayed at the Centennial had reached their
+high point of development--a metamorphosis that began with the medieval
+European tool forms, moved through a period of reliance on English
+precedents, and ended, in the last quarter of the 19th century, with the
+production of American hand tools "occupying an enviable position before
+the world."[11]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 54.--1809: THE INTRODUCTION of the gimlet-pointed
+auger followed Ezra L'Hommedieu's patent of 1809. From this date until
+its general disuse in the early 20th century, the conformation of the
+tool remained unchanged, although the quality of steel and the precision
+of the twist steadily improved. (Wash drawing from the restored patent
+drawings awarded July 31, 1809, U.S. Patent Office, Record Group 241,
+the National Archives. Smithsonian photo 49790-A.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 55.--1855: RUSSELL JENNINGS' improved auger bits,
+first patented in 1855, received superior citation at the Philadelphia
+Centennial; in the years following, the trade name "Jennings" was seldom
+omitted from trade catalogues. (Original wash drawing, patent drawing
+submitted by R. Jennings, U.S. Patent Office, Record Group 241, the
+National Archives.)]
+
+The tool most highly praised at Philadelphia was the American felling
+axe (fig. 52) "made out of a solid piece of cast steel" with the eye
+"punched out of the solid." When compared to other forms, the American
+axe was "more easily worked," and its shape permitted an easier
+withdrawal after striking.[12]
+
+Sawmakers, too, were singled out for praise--in particular Disston &
+Sons (fig. 53) for "improvements in the form of the handles, and in the
+mode of fixing them to the saw." The Disston saw also embodied an
+improved blade shape which made it "lighter and more convenient by
+giving it a greater taper to the point." Sheffield saws, once supplied
+to most of the world, were not exhibited at Philadelphia, and the
+British expert lamented that our "monopoly remains with us no
+longer."[13]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 56.--1894: THE PERSISTENCE OF "JENNINGS" AS A
+TRADE NAME is suggested by the vignette from the "Illustrated Catalogue"
+of Baldwin, Robbins and Company, published in 1894. (Smithsonian photo
+56628.)]
+
+Augers, essential to "the heavier branches of the building trade ...
+[and] in the workshops of joiners, carpenters, cabinetmakers, turners,
+carvers, and by amateurs and others," were considered a "most important
+exhibit" at the Centennial. The auger had attained a perfection in "the
+accuracy of the twist, the various forms of the cutters, the quality of
+the steel, and fine finish of the twist and polish." The ancient pod or
+shell auger had nearly disappeared from use, to be replaced by "the
+screwed form of the tool" considerably refined by comparison to
+L'Hommedieu's prototype, patented in 1809 (fig. 54). Russell Jennings'
+patented auger bits (figs. 55-56) were cited for their "workmanship and
+quality," and, collectively, the Exhibition "fully established the
+reputation of American augers."[14] Likewise, makers of braces and bits
+were commended for the number of excellent examples shown. Some were a
+departure from the familiar design with "an expansive chuck for the
+bit," but others were simply elegant examples of the traditional brace,
+in wood, japanned and heavily reinforced with highly polished brass
+sidings. An example exhibited by E. Mills and Company, of Philadelphia,
+received a certification from the judges as being "of the best quality
+and finish" (fig. 57). The Mills brace, together with other
+award-winning tools of the company--drawknives, screwdrivers, and
+spokeshaves--is preserved in the collections of the Smithsonian
+Institution (accession 319326). Today as a group they confirm "the
+remarkably fine quality of ... both iron and steel" that characterized
+the manufacture of American edge tools in the second half of the 19th
+century.[15]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 57.--1876: JAPANNED AND SPLINTED WITH HEAVY BRASS,
+this brace was among the award-winning tools exhibited at the Centennial
+by E. Mills and Company of Philadelphia. (Smithsonian photo 49792-D.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 58.--1827: THE BENCH PLANES exhibited at
+Philadelphia in 1876 were a radical departure from the traditional. In
+1827 H. Knowles patented an iron-bodied bench plane that portended a
+change in form that would witness a substitution of steel for wood in
+all critical areas of the tool's construction, and easy adjustment of
+the cutting edge by a setscrew, and an increased flexibility that
+allowed one plane to be used for several purposes. (Wash drawing from
+the restored patent drawings, August 24, 1827, U.S. Patent Office,
+Record Group 241, the National Archives.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 59.--1857: THE ADDITION OF METALLIC PARTS to
+critical areas of wear as suggested by M.B. Tidey did not at first
+radically alter the design of the bench plane. (Wash drawing from U.S.
+Patent Office, March 24, 1857, Record Group 241, the National
+Archives.)]
+
+It is the plane, however, that best exemplifies the progress of tool
+design. In 1876, American planemakers were enthusiastically credited
+with having achieved "an important change in the structure of the
+tool."[16] Although change had been suggested by American patentees as
+early as the 1820's, mass production lagged until after the Civil War,
+and the use of this new tool form was not widespread outside of the
+United States. Hazard Knowles of Colchester, Connecticut, in 1827,
+patented a plane stock of cast iron which in many respects was a
+prototype of later Centennial models (fig. 58).[17] It is evident, even
+in its earliest manifestation, that the quest for improvement of the
+bench plane did not alter its sound design. In 1857, M.B. Tidey (fig.
+59) listed several of the goals that motivated planemakers:
+
+     First to simplify the manufacturing of planes; second to render
+     them more durable; third to retain a uniform mouth; fourth to
+     obviate their clogging; and fifth the retention of the essential
+     part of the plane when the stock is worn out.[18]
+
+By far the greatest number of patents was concerned with perfecting an
+adjustable plane iron and methods of constructing the sole of a plane so
+that it would always be "true." Obviously the use of metal rather than
+the older medium, wood, was a natural step, but in the process of
+changing from the wood to the iron-bodied bench plane there were many
+transitional suggestions that combined both materials. Seth Howes of
+South Chatham, Massachusetts, in U.S. patent 37,694, specified:
+
+     This invention relates to an improvement in that class of planes
+     which are commonly termed "bench-planes," comprising the foreplane,
+     smoothing plane, jack plane, jointer, &c.
+
+     The invention consists in a novel and improved mode of adjusting
+     the plane-iron to regulate the depth of the cut of the same, in
+     connection with an adjustable cap, all being constructed and
+     arranged in such a manner that the plane-iron may be "set" with the
+     greatest facility and firmly retained in position by the adjustment
+     simply of the cap to the plane-iron, after the latter is set, and
+     the cap also rendered capable of being adjusted to compensate for
+     the wear of the "sole" or face of the plane stock.
+
+The stock of Howes' plane was wood combined with metal plates, caps, and
+screws. Thomas Worrall of Lowell was issued patent 17,657 for a plane
+based on the same general principle (fig. 60). Worrall claimed in his
+specifications of June 23, 1857:
+
+     the improved manufacture of [the] carpenter's bench plane or
+     jointer as made with its handle, its wooden stock to which said
+     handle is affixed, and a separate metallic cutter holder, and
+     cutter clamping devices arranged together substantially as
+     specified.
+
+Finally patentees throughout the 19th century, faced with an increasing
+proliferation of tool types, frequently sought to perfect multipurpose
+implements of a type best represented later by the ubiquitous Stanley
+plane. The evolution of the all-purpose idea, which is incidentally not
+peculiar to hand tools alone, can be seen from random statements
+selected from U.S. patents for the improvement of bench planes. In 1864
+Stephen Williams in the specifications of his patent 43,360 stated:
+
+     I denominate my improvement the "universal smoothing plane,"
+     because it belongs to that variety of planes in which the face is
+     made changeable, so that it may be conveniently adapted to the
+     planing of curved as well as straight surfaces. By the use of my
+     improvement surfaces that are convex, concave, or straight may be
+     easily worked, the face of the tool being readily changed from one
+     form to another to suit the surface to which it is to be applied.
+
+The announced object of Theodore Duval's improved grooving plane (pat.
+97,177) was "to produce in one tool all that is required to form grooves
+of several different widths." None was more appealing than Daniel D.
+Whitker's saw-rabbet plane (pat. 52,478) which combined "an adjustable
+saw with an adjustable fence or gage, both being attached to a stock
+with handle similar to a plane, forming together a tool combining the
+properties of the joiner's plow and fillister" (fig. 61). Nor was
+Whitker's idea simply a drawing-board exercise. It was produced
+commercially and was well advertised, as seen in the circular reproduced
+in figure 62.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 60.--1857: IN A VARIETY OF ARRANGEMENTS, the
+addition of metal plates, caps, and screws at the mouth of the plane, as
+shown in Thomas Worrall's drawing, proved a transitional device that
+preserved the ancient shape of the tool and slowed the introduction of
+bench planes made entirely of iron. (Wash drawing from U.S. Patent
+Office, June 23, 1857, Record Group 241, the National Archives.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 61.--1865: NOT ALL MULTIPURPOSE INNOVATIONS
+resulted from the use of new materials. Daniel D. Whitker patented a
+combination saw and rabbet plane little different from one illustrated
+by André-Jacob Roubo in his _L'Art du menuisier_ in 1769. (Wash drawing
+from U.S. Patent Office, October 4, 1865, Record Group 241, the National
+Archives.)]
+
+In sum, these ideas produced a major break with the traditional shape of
+the bench plane. William Foster in 1843 (pat. 3,355), Birdsill Holly in
+1852 (pat. 9,094), and W.S. Loughborough in 1859 (pat. 23,928) are
+particularly good examples of the radical departure from the wooden
+block. And, in the period after the Civil War, C.G. Miller (discussed on
+p. 213 and in fig. 63), B.A. Blandin (fig. 64), and Russell Phillips
+(pat. 106,868) patented multipurpose metallic bench planes of excellent
+design. It should be pointed out that the patentees mentioned above
+represent only a few of the great number that tried to improve the
+plane. Only the trend of change is suggested by the descriptions and
+illustrations presented here. The cumulative effect awaited a showcase,
+and the planemakers found it at the Centennial Exhibition of 1876 held
+in Philadelphia.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 62.--ABOUT 1865: THE PROGRESS OF AN IDEA from an
+18th-century encyclopedia through an American patentee to commercial
+reality can be seen in this flier advertising Whitker's saw-rabbet.
+(Smithsonian Institution Library. Smithsonian photo 56629.)]
+
+The impact of these new planes at the Exhibition caused some
+retrospection among the judges:
+
+     The planes manufactured in Great Britain and in other countries
+     fifty years ago were formed of best beech-wood; the plane irons
+     were of steel and iron welded together; the jointer plane, about 21
+     inches long, was a bulky tool; the jack and hand planes were of the
+     same materials. Very little change has been made upon the plane in
+     Great Britain, unless in the superior workmanship and higher
+     quality of the plane iron.[19]
+
+The solid wood-block plane, varying from country to country only in the
+structure of its handles and body decoration, had preserved its
+integrity of design since the Middle Ages. At the Centennial, however,
+only a few examples of the old-type plane were exhibited. A new shape
+dominated the cases. Designated by foreign observers as the American
+plane, it received extended comment. Here was a tool
+
+     constructed with a skeleton iron body, having a curved wooden
+     handle; the plane iron is of the finest cast-steel; the cover is
+     fitted with an ingenious trigger at the top, which, with a screw
+     below the iron, admits of the plane iron being removed for
+     sharpening and setting without the aid of the hammer, and with the
+     greatest ease. The extensive varieties of plane iron in use are
+     fitted for every requirement; a very ingenious arrangement is
+     applied to the tools for planing the insides of circles or other
+     curved works, such as stair-rails, etc. The sole of the plane is
+     formed of a plate of tempered steel about the thickness of a
+     handsaw, according to the length required, and this plate is
+     adapted to the curve, and is securely fixed at each end. With this
+     tool the work is not only done better but in less time than
+     formerly. In some exhibits the face of the plane was made of beech
+     or of other hard wood, secured by screws to the stock, and the tool
+     becomes a hybrid, all other parts remaining the same as in the iron
+     plane.[20]
+
+The popularity of Bailey's patented planes (fig. 65), the type so
+praised above, was by no means transitory. In 1884 the Boston firm of
+Goodnow & Wightman, "Importers, Manufacturers and Dealers in Tools of
+all kinds," illustrated the several planes just described and assured
+prospective buyers that
+
+     These tools meet with universal approbation from the best
+     Mechanics. For beauty of style and finish they are unequalled, and
+     the great convenience in operating renders them the cheapest Planes
+     in use; they are SELF-ADJUSTING in every respect; and each part
+     being made INTERCHANGEABLE, can be replaced at a trifling
+     expense.[21]
+
+By 1900 an advertisement for Bailey's planes published in the catalogue
+of another Boston firm, Chandler and Farquhar, indicated that "over
+900,000" had already been sold.[22]
+
+Other mass-produced edge tools--axes, adzes, braces and bits, augers,
+saws, and chisels--illustrated in the trade literature of the toolmakers
+became, as had the iron-bodied bench plane, standard forms. In the last
+quarter of the 19th century the tool catalogue replaced Moxon, Duhamel,
+Diderot, and the builders' manuals as the primary source for the study
+and identification of hand tools. The Centennial had called attention to
+the superiority of certain American tools and toolmakers. The result was
+that until the end of the century, trade literature faithfully drummed
+the products that had proven such "an attraction to the numerous
+artisans who visited the Centennial Exhibition from the United States
+and other countries."[23]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 63.--1870: THE METALLIC VERSION OF THE PLOW PLANE
+later produced by Stanley and Company was patented by [Charles] G.
+Miller as a tool readily "convertible into a grooving, rabbeting, or
+smoothing plane." In production this multipurpose plow gained an
+elaborate decoration (fig. 51) nowhere suggested in Miller's
+specification. (Wash drawing from U.S. Patent Office, June 28, 1870,
+Record Group 241, the National Archives.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 64.--1867: THE DRAWING accompanying B.A. Blandin's
+specification for an "Improvement in Bench Planes" retained only the
+familiarly shaped handle or tote of the traditional wood-bodied plane.
+This new shape rapidly became the standard form of the tool with later
+variations chiefly related to the adjustability of the plane-iron and
+sole. (Wash drawing from U.S. Patent Office, May 7, 1867, Record Group
+241, the National Archives.)]
+
+Collins and Company of New York City had been given commendation for the
+excellence of their axes; through the end of the century, Collins' brand
+felling axes, broad axes, and adzes were standard items, as witness
+Hammacher, Schlemmer and Company's catalogue of 1896.[24] Disston saws
+were a byword, and the impact of their exhibit at Philadelphia was still
+strong, as judged from Baldwin, Robbins' catalogue of 1894. Highly
+recommended was the Disston no. 76, the "Centennial" handsaw with its
+"skew back" and "apple handle." Jennings' patented auger bits were
+likewise standard fare in nearly every tool catalogue.[25] So were bench
+planes manufactured by companies that had been cited at Philadelphia for
+the excellence of their product; namely, The Metallic Plane Company,
+Auburn, New York; The Middletown Tool Company, Middletown, Connecticut;
+Bailey, Leonard, and Company, Hartford; and The Sandusky Tool Company,
+Sandusky, Ohio.[26]
+
+An excellent indication of the persistence of the Centennial influence,
+and of the tool catalogue as source material, is seen in Chandler and
+Farquhar's illustrated pamphlet of 1900. Their advertisement for
+Barber's improved ratchet brace (fig. 66), a tool much admired by the
+Centennial judges, amply illustrates the evolution of design of a basic
+implement present in American society since the first years of
+settlement. The Barber brace represents the ultimate sophistication of a
+tool, achieved through an expanded industrial technology rather than by
+an extended or newly found use for the device itself. It is a prime
+example of the transition of a tool from Moxon to its perfected form in
+the 20th century:
+
+     These Braces possess the following points of superiority: The Sweep
+     is made from Steel; the Jaws are forged from Steel; the Wood Handle
+     has brass rings inserted in each end so it cannot split off; the
+     Chuck has a hardened Steel antifriction washer between the two
+     sockets, thus reducing the wear. The Head has a bearing of steel
+     balls, running on hard steel plates, so no wear can take place, as
+     the friction is reduced to the minimum. The Brace is heavily
+     nickel-plated and warranted in every particular. We endeavor to
+     make these goods as nearly perfection as is possible in durability,
+     quality of material and workmanship, and fineness and beauty of
+     finish.[27]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 65.--1900: AMERICAN PLANEMAKERS had been cited at
+the Philadelphia Centennial as having introduced a dramatic change in
+the nature of the tool. Although wood-bodied planes continued to be
+used, they were outdated and in fact anachronistic by the close of the
+19th century. From the 1870's forward, it was the iron-bodied plane,
+most frequently Bailey's, that enlivened the trade literature.
+(Catalogue of Chandler and Farquhar, Boston, 1900. Smithsonian photo
+55798.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 66.--1900: FEW TOOLS SUGGEST MORE CLEARLY the
+influence of modern industrial society upon the design and construction
+of traditional implements than Barber's ratchet brace. It is not without
+interest that as the tools of the wood craftsman became crisply
+efficient, his work declined correspondingly in individuality and
+character. The brace and the plane, as followed from Moxon through the
+trade literature of the late 19th century, achieved perfection in form
+and operation at a time when their basic functions had been usurped by
+machines. (Catalogue of Chandler and Farquhar, Boston, 1900. Smithsonian
+photo 56626.)]
+
+The description of Barber's brace documents a major technical change:
+wood to steel, leather washers to ball bearings, and natural patina to
+nickel plate. It is also an explanation for the appearance and shape of
+craftmen's tools, either hand forged or mass produced. In each case, the
+sought-after result in the form of a finished product has been an
+implement of "fineness and beauty." This quest motivated three centuries
+of toolmakers and brought vitality to hand-tool design. Moxon had
+advised:
+
+  He that will a good Edge win,
+  Must Forge thick and Grind thin.[28]
+
+If heeded, the result would be an edge tool that assured its owner "ease
+and delight."[29] Throughout the period considered here, the most
+praiseworthy remarks made about edge tools were variations of either
+"unsurpassed in quality, finish, and beauty of style" or, more simply,
+commendation for "excellent design and superior workmanship."[30] The
+hand tool thus provoked the same value words in the 19th as in the 17th
+century.
+
+The aesthetics of industrial art, whether propounded by Moxon or by an
+official at the Philadelphia Centennial, proved the standard measure by
+which quality could be judged. Today these values are particularly valid
+when applied to a class of artifacts that changed slowly and have as
+their prime characteristics anonymity of maker and date. With such
+objects the origin, transition, and variation of shape are of primary
+interest. Consider the common auger whose "Office" Moxon declared "is to
+make great round holes" and whose importance was so clearly stressed at
+Philadelphia in 1876.[31] Neither its purpose nor its gross appearance
+(a T-handled boring tool) had changed. The tool did, however, develop
+qualitatively through 200 years, from a pod or shell to a spiral bit,
+from a blunt to a gimlet point, and from a hand-fashioned to a
+geometrically exact, factory-made implement: innovations associated with
+Cooke (1770), L'Hommedieu (1809), and Jennings (1850's). In each
+instance the tool was improved--a double spiral facilitated the
+discharge of shavings, a gimlet point allowed the direct insertion of
+the auger, and machine precision brought mathematical accuracy to the
+degree of twist. Still, overall appearance did not change. At the
+Centennial, Moxon would have recognized an auger, and, further, his
+lecture on its uses would have been singularly current. The large-bore
+spiral auger still denoted a mortise, tenon, and trenail mode of
+building in a wood-based technology; at the same time its near cousin,
+the wheelwright's reamer, suggested the reliance upon a transport
+dependent upon wooden hubs. The auger in its perfected form--fine steel,
+perfectly machined, and highly finished--contrasted with an auger of
+earlier vintage will clearly show the advance from forge to factory, but
+will indicate little new in its method of use or its intended purpose.
+
+Persons neither skilled in the use of tools nor interested in technical
+history will find that there is another response to the common auger, as
+there was to the upholsterer's hammer, the 18th-century brace, or the
+saw with the custom-fitted grip. This is a subjective reaction to a
+pleasing form. It is the same reaction that prompted artists to use
+tools as vehicles to help convey lessons in perspective, a frequent
+practice in 19th-century art manuals. The harmony of related parts--the
+balance of shaft and handle or the geometry of the twist--makes the
+auger a decorative object. This is not to say that the ancient
+woodworker's tool is not a document attesting a society's technical
+proficiency--ingenuity, craftsmanship, and productivity. It is only to
+suggest again that it is something more; a survival of the past whose
+intrinsic qualities permit it to stand alone as a bridge between the
+craftsman's hand and his work; an object of considerable appeal in which
+integrity of line and form is not dimmed by the skill of the user nor by
+the quality of the object produced by it.
+
+In America, this integrity of design is derived from three centuries of
+experience: one of heterogeneous character, the mid-17th to the
+mid-18th; one of predominately English influence, from 1750 to 1850; and
+one that saw the perfection of basic tools, by native innovators,
+between 1850 and the early 20th century. In the two earlier periods, the
+woodworking tool and the products it finished had a natural affinity
+owing largely to the harmony of line that both the tool and finished
+product shared. The later period, however, presents a striking contrast.
+Hand-tool design, with few exceptions, continued vigorous and functional
+amidst the confusion of an eclectic architecture, a flurry of rival
+styles, the horrors of the jigsaw, and the excesses of Victorian taste.
+In conclusion, it would seem that whether seeking some continuous thread
+in the evolution of a national style, or whether appraising American
+contributions to technology, such a search must rest, at least in part,
+upon the character and quality of the hand tools the society has made
+and used, because they offer a continuity largely unknown to other
+classes of material survivals.
+
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1] W.M. FLINDERS PETRIE, "History in Tools," _Annual Report Smithsonian
+Institution_, 1918, pp. 563-572 [reprint].
+
+[2] JOHANN AMOS COMENIUS, _Orbis Sensualium Pictus_, transl. Charles
+Hoole (London, 1685), pp. 130, 143.
+
+[3] JOSEPH MOXON, _Mechanick Exercises or the Doctrine of Handy-Works_,
+3rd. ed. (London, 1703), pp. 63, 119.
+
+[4] MARTIN, _Circle of the Mechanical Arts_ (1813), p. 123.
+
+[5] PETER NICHOLSON, _The Mechanic's Companion_ (Philadelphia, 1832),
+pp. 31, 89-90.
+
+[6] _Catalog_, Book 87, Cutler and Co., Castle Hill Works, Sheffield [in
+the collections of the Victoria and Albert Museum, London]; and
+_Illustrated Supplement to the Catalogue of Bench Planes_, Arrowmammett
+Works (Middletown, Conn., 1857) [in the Smithsonian Institution
+Library].
+
+[7] York County Records, Virginia Deeds, Orders, and Wills, no. 13
+(1706-1710), p. 248; and the inventory of Amasa Thompson in LAWRENCE B.
+ROMAINE, "A Yankee Carpenter and His Tools," _The Chronicle_ of the
+Early American Industries Association (July 1953), vol. 6, no. 3, pp.
+33-34.
+
+[8] _Reports by the Juries: Exhibition of the Works of Industry of All
+Nations, 1851_ (London, 1852), p. 485.
+
+[9] U.S. patent specifications cited in this paragraph may be found at
+the U.S. Patent Office, Washington, D.C.
+
+[10] In 1865 George Parr in his application for an improved screwdriver
+stated categorically that the scalloped blade served no purpose other
+than decoration. See U.S. patent 45,854, dated January 10, 1865.
+
+[11] Francis A. Walker, ed., _United States Centennial Commission,
+International Exhibition, 1876, Reports and Awards, Group XV_
+(Philadelphia, 1877), p. 5.
+
+[12] Ibid., p. 6.
+
+[13] Ibid., pp. 9-10.
+
+[14] Ibid., pp. 11-12.
+
+[15] Ibid., pp. 14, 44, 5.
+
+[16] Ibid., p. 13.
+
+[17] Restored patent 4,859X, August 24, 1827, National Archives,
+Washington, D.C.
+
+[18] U.S. pat. 16,889, U.S. Patent Office, Washington, D.C. The numbered
+specifications that follow may be found in the same place.
+
+[19] Walker, ed., _Reports and Awards_, group 15, p. 13.
+
+[20] Ibid.
+
+[21] _Tools_ (Boston, 1884), p. 54 [in the Smithsonian Institution
+Library].
+
+[22] _Tools and Supplies_ (June 1900), no. 85 [in the Smithsonian
+Institution Library].
+
+[23] Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), p. 14.
+
+[24] _Tools for All Trades_ (New York, 1896), item 75 [in the
+Smithsonian Institution Library].
+
+[25] See _Baldwin, Robbins & Co.: Illustrated Catalogue_ (Boston, 1894),
+pp. 954, 993 [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].
+
+[26] Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), p. 14.
+
+[27] _Tools and Supplies_, op. cit. (footnote 22).
+
+[28] _Mechanick Exercise_ ..., p. 62.
+
+[29] Ibid., p. 95.
+
+[30] Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), pp. 31-49.
+
+[31] _Mechanick Exercises_ ..., p. 94.
+
+
+
+
+BIBLIOGRAPHY
+
+
+_Book of trades, or library of the useful arts._ 1st Amer. ed.
+Whitehall, N.Y., 1807.
+
+_Boy's book of trades._ London, 1866.
+
+_The cabinetmaker in eighteenth-century Williamsburg._ (Williamsburg
+Craft Series.) Williamsburg, Va., 1963.
+
+COMENIUS, JOHANN AMOS. _Orbis sensualium pictus._ Transl. Charles Hoole.
+London, 1664, 1685, 1777, et al.
+
+COTTER, JOHN L. _Archeological excavations at Jamestown, Virginia._ (No.
+4 in Archeological Research Series.) Washington: National Park Service,
+1958.
+
+DIDEROT, DENIS. _L'encyclopédie, ou dictionnaire raisonné des sciences,
+des arts et des métiers._ Paris, 1751-1765.
+
+EARLY AMERICAN INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION. _Chronicle._ Williamsburg, Va.,
+1933+.
+
+GILLISPIE, CHARLES COULSTON, ed. _A Diderot pictorial encyclopedia of
+trades and industry._ New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1959.
+
+GOODMAN, W.L. _The history of woodworking tools._ London: G. Bell and
+Sons, Ltd., 1964.
+
+HOLTZAPFFEL, CHARLES. _Turning and mechanical manipulations._ London
+[1846].
+
+KNIGHT, EDWARD HENRY. _Knight's American mechanical dictionary._ New
+York, 1874-1876.
+
+MARTIN, THOMAS. _The circle of the mechanical arts._ London, 1813.
+
+MERCER, HENRY C. _Ancient carpenters' tools._ Doylestown, Pennsylvania:
+The Bucks County Historical Society, 1951.
+
+MOXON, JOSEPH. _Mechanick exercises._ 3rd ed. London, 1703.
+
+NICHOLSON, PETER. _The mechanic's companion._ Philadelphia, 1832.
+
+PETERSEN, EUGENE T. _Gentlemen on the frontier: A pictorial record of
+the culture of Michilimackinac._ Mackinac Island, Mich., 1964.
+
+PETRIE, SIR WILLIAM MATTHEW FLINDERS. _Tools and weapons illustrated by
+the Egyptian collection in University College, London._ London, 1917.
+
+ROUBO, ANDRÉ-JACOB. _L'art du menuisier._ (In Henri-Louis Duhamel du
+Monceau, _Descriptions des arts et métiers_.) Paris, 1761-1788.
+
+SACHS, HANS. _Das Ständebuch: 114 Holzschnitte von Jost Amman, mit
+Reimen von Hans Sachs._ Leipzig: Insel-Verlag, 1934.
+
+SINGER, CHARLES, et al. _A history of technology._ 5 vols. New York and
+London: Oxford University Press, 1954-1958.
+
+SLOANE, ERIC. _A museum of early American tools._ New York: Wilfred
+Funk, Inc., 1964.
+
+TOMLINSON, CHARLES. _Illustrations of trades._ 2nd ed. London, 1867.
+
+WELSH, PETER C. "The Decorative Appeal of Hand Tools," _Antiques_, vol.
+87, no. 2, February 1965, pp. 204-207.
+
+---- U.S. patents, 1790-1870: New uses for old ideas. Paper 48 in
+_Contributions from the Museum of History and Technology:_ Papers 45-53
+(U.S. National Museum Bulletin 241), by various authors; Washington:
+Smithsonian Institution, 1965.
+
+WILDUNG, FRANK H. _Woodworking tools at Shelburne Museum._ (No. 3 in
+Museum Pamphlet Series.) Shelburne, Vermont: The Shelburne Museum, 1957.
+
+
+  U.S. Government Printing Office: 1966
+
+  For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
+  Office Washington, D.C., 20402--Price 70 cents
+
+  _Paper 51, pages 178-228, from_ UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN
+
+  [Illustration]
+
+  CONTRIBUTIONS FROM
+  THE MUSEUM OF HISTORY
+  AND TECHNOLOGY
+
+  SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION · WASHINGTON, D.C.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of Project Gutenberg's Woodworking Tools 1600-1900, by Peter C. Welsh
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WOODWORKING TOOLS 1600-1900 ***
+
+***** This file should be named 27238-8.txt or 27238-8.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        https://www.gutenberg.org/2/7/2/3/27238/
+
+Produced by Chris Curnow, Joseph Cooper, Greg Bergquist
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+https://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+https://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at https://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit https://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     https://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/27238-8.zip b/27238-8.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..58f9438
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-8.zip
diff --git a/27238-h.zip b/27238-h.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b36767e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h.zip
diff --git a/27238-h/27238-h.htm b/27238-h/27238-h.htm
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ff7ca70
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/27238-h.htm
@@ -0,0 +1,2751 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
+  <head>
+    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1" />
+    <title>
+      The Project Gutenberg eBook of Woodworking Tools, 1600&ndash;1900, by Peter C. Welsh.
+    </title>
+    <style type="text/css">
+/*<![CDATA[  XML blockout */
+<!--
+    p {  margin-top: .75em;
+         text-align: justify;
+         margin-bottom: .75em;
+         text-indent: 1.25em;
+         line-height: 130%;
+         }
+    p.t1 {text-align: right; text-indent: 0em; font-variant: small-caps; font-size: 120%;}
+    p.t2 {text-align: right; text-indent: 0em; }
+
+    h1, h3 {
+         text-align: center;
+         clear: both;
+         font-weight: normal;
+         }
+
+    hr { width: 33%;
+	 margin-top: 2em;
+	 margin-bottom: 2em;
+         margin-left: auto;
+         margin-right: auto;
+         clear: both;
+       }
+
+    table {margin-left: auto; margin-right: 0em; font-size: 80%;}
+
+    .tb1 {margin-right: auto;}
+
+    body{margin-left: 10%;
+         margin-right: 10%;
+        }
+
+
+    .blockquot{margin-left: 5%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 90%; line-height: 120%;}
+
+    .center   {text-align: center;}
+    .smcap    {font-variant: small-caps;}
+    .dcap  {float: left; padding-right: 3px; font-size: 300%; line-height: 80%;}
+    .above, .below { font-size: 70%;}
+    .above { vertical-align: 0.7ex; }
+    .below { vertical-align: -0.3ex; }
+    .noin {text-indent: 0em;}
+
+    .caption  {font-weight: normal;}
+
+    .figcenter   {margin: auto; text-align: justify; margin-top: 2em;}
+
+    .figleft     {float: left; clear: left; margin-left: 0; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-top:
+                 2em; margin-right: 1em; padding: 0; text-align: justify;}
+
+    .figright    {float: right; clear: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em;
+                 margin-top: 2em; margin-right: 0; padding: 0; text-align: justify;}
+
+    .footnotes        {border: dashed 1px;}
+    .footnote         {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;}
+    .footnote .label  {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;}
+    .fnanchor         {font-size: .8em; text-decoration: none;}
+
+    // -->
+    /* XML end  ]]>*/
+    </style>
+  </head>
+<body>
+
+
+<pre>
+
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of Woodworking Tools 1600-1900, by Peter C. Welsh
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: Woodworking Tools 1600-1900
+
+Author: Peter C. Welsh
+
+Release Date: November 12, 2008 [EBook #27238]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WOODWORKING TOOLS 1600-1900 ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Chris Curnow, Joseph Cooper, Greg Bergquist
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+https://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+</pre>
+
+
+
+
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 600px;"><a href="images/icover.jpg">
+<img src="images/icover_th.jpg" width="600" height="861" alt="" title="" /></a>
+</div>
+<p><small><i>Cover design after engraving from Diderot.</i></small></p>
+
+<hr />
+<p class="t1">
+Contributions From<br />
+The Museum of History and Technology:<br />
+<br />
+Paper 51<br />
+<br /><br />
+<br /><br />
+<br /><br />
+<br /><br />
+Woodworking Tools, 1600&ndash;1900<br />
+<br /></p>
+<p class="t2"><i>Peter C. Welsh</i><br /></p>
+
+
+<div class='right'><br /><br />
+<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Table of Contents">
+<tr><td align='right'><a href="#Specialization">SPECIALIZATION</a></td><td align='right'>183</td></tr>
+<tr><td align='right'><a href="#Configuration">CONFIGURATION</a></td><td align='right'>194</td></tr>
+<tr><td align='right'><a href="#Change">CHANGE</a></td><td align='right'>214</td></tr>
+<tr><td align='right'><a href="#BIBLIOGRAPHY">BIBLIOGRAPHY</a></td><td align='right'>227</td></tr>
+</table></div>
+<hr />
+<p class="t2"><big>
+<i>Peter C Welsh</i></big><br /><br /><br /><br />
+</p>
+
+
+
+<h1>WOODWORKING TOOLS<br />
+
+<small>1600&ndash;1900</small></h1>
+
+
+<div class="blockquot"><p><i>This history of woodworking hand tools from the 17th to the 20th
+century is one of a very gradual evolution of tools through
+generations of craftsmen. As a result, the sources of changes in
+design are almost impossible to ascertain. Published sources,
+moreover, have been concerned primarily with the object shaped by
+the tool rather than the tool itself. The resulting scarcity of
+information is somewhat compensated for by collections in museums
+and restorations.</i></p>
+
+<p><i>In this paper, the author spans three centuries in discussing the
+specialization, configuration, and change of woodworking tools in
+the United States.</i></p>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">The Author:</span> <i>Peter C. Welsh is curator, Growth of the United
+States, in the Smithsonian Institution's Museum of History and
+Technology.</i> </p></div>
+
+<p><span class="dcap">I</span><span class="smcap">n 1918, PROFESSOR W.M.F. PETRIE</span> concluded a brief article on "History
+in Tools" with a reminder that the history of this subject "has yet to
+be studied," and lamented the survival of so few precisely dated
+specimens. What Petrie found so discouraging in studying the implements
+of the ancient world has consistently plagued those concerned with tools
+of more recent vintage. Anonymity is the chief characteristic of hand
+tools of the last three centuries. The reasons are many: first, the tool
+is an object of daily use, subjected while in service to hard wear and,
+in some cases, ultimate destruction; second, a tool's usefulness is apt
+to continue through many years and through the hands of several
+generations of craftsmen, with the result that its origins become lost;
+third, the achievement of an implement of demonstrated proficiency
+dictated against radical, and therefore easily datable, changes in shape
+or style; and fourth, dated survivals needed to establish a range of
+firm control specimens for the better identification of unknowns,
+particularly the wooden elements of tools&mdash;handles, moldings, and plane
+bodies&mdash;are frustratingly few in non-arid archaeological sites. When
+tracing the provenance of American tools there is the additional problem
+of heterogeneous origins and shapes&mdash;that is, what was the appearance
+of a given tool prior to its standardization in England and the United
+States? The answer requires a brief summary of the origin of selected
+tool shapes, particularly those whose form was common to both the
+British Isles and the Continent in the 17th century. Beyond this, when
+did the shape of English tools begin to differ from the shape of tools
+of the Continent? Finally, what tool forms predominated in American
+usage and when, if in fact ever, did any of these tools achieve a
+distinctly American character? In the process of framing answers to
+these questions, one is confronted by a constantly diminishing
+literature, coupled with a steadily increasing number of tool types.<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 400px;">
+<img src="images/image1.jpg" width="400" height="285" alt="Figure 1." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 1.&mdash;1685: <span class="smcap">The principal tools</span> that the carpenter
+needed to frame a house, as listed by <span class="smcap">Johann Amos Comenius</span> in his <i>Orbis
+Sensualium Pictus</i> were the felling axe (4), wedge and beetle (7 and 8),
+chip axe (10), saw (12), trestle (14), and pulley (15). (Charles Hoole
+transl., London, 1685. <i>Courtesy of the Folger Shakespeare Library.</i>)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 400px;">
+<img src="images/image2.jpg" width="400" height="304" alt="Figure 2." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 2.&mdash;1685: <span class="smcap">The boxmaker and turner</span> as pictured by
+Comenius required planes (3 and 5), workbench (4), auger (6), knife (7),
+and lathe (14). (From Johann Amos Comenius, <i>Orbis Sensualium Pictus.
+Courtesy of the Folger Shakespeare Library.</i>)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>The literature of the subject, both new and old, is sparse, with
+interest always centering upon the object shaped by the craftsman's tool
+rather than upon the tool itself. Henry Mercer's <i>Ancient Carpenters'
+Tools</i>, first published in 1929, is an exception. It remains a rich
+source of information based primarily on the marvelous collections
+preserved by the Bucks County Historical Society. Since 1933, the Early
+American Industries Association, both through collecting and through its
+<i>Chronicle</i>, has called attention to the vanishing trades, their tools
+and techniques; the magazine <i>Antiques</i> has occasionally dealt with this
+subject. Historians of economic and industrial development usually
+neglect the tools of the woodcrafts, and when considering the
+toolmakers, they have reference only to the inventors and producers of
+machine tools. The dearth of written material is somewhat compensated
+for by the collections of hand tools in American museums and
+restorations, notably those at Williamsburg, Cooperstown, Old Sturbridge
+Village, Winterthur, the Henry Ford Museum, and Shelburne; at the latter
+in particular the extensive collection has been bolstered by Frank H.
+Wildung's museum pamphlet, "Woodworking Tools at Shelburne Museum."
+The most informative recent American work on the subject is Eric
+Sloane's handsomely illustrated <i>A Museum of Early American Tools</i>,
+published in 1964. Going beyond just the tools of the woodworker,
+Sloane's book also includes agricultural implements. It is a delightful
+combination of appreciation of early design, nostalgia, and useful fact.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image3a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image3.jpg" width="450" height="658" alt="Figure 3." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 3.&mdash;1703: <span class="smcap">The tools of the joiner</span> illustrated by
+Moxon are the workbench (A), fore plane (B. 1), jointer (B. 2),
+strike-block (B. 3), smoothing plane (B. 4 and B. 7), rabbet plane (B.
+5), plow (B. 6), forming chisels (C. 1 and C. 3), paring chisel (C. 2),
+skew former (C. 4), mortising chisel (sec. C. 5), gouge (C. 6), square
+(D), bevel (F), gauge (G), brace and bit (H), gimlet (I), auger (K),
+hatchet (L), pit saw (M), whipsaw (N), frame saw (O), saw set (Q),
+handsaw (unmarked), and compass saw (E). (Joseph Moxon, <i>Mechanick
+Exercises</i> ..., 3rd ed., London, 1703. Library of Congress.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image4a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image4.jpg" width="450" height="660" alt="Figure 4." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 4.&mdash;1703: <span class="smcap">Only the principal tools</span> used in
+carpentry are listed by Moxon: the axe (A), adz (B), socket chisel (C),
+ripping chisel (D), drawknife (E), hookpin (F), bevel (G), plumb line
+(H), hammer (I), commander (K), crow (L), and jack (M). (Moxon,
+<i>Mechanick Exercises</i> ..., 1703. Library of Congress.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>Charles Hummel's forthcoming <i>With Hammer in Hand: The Dominy Craftsmen
+of East Hampton</i>&mdash;to be published by the Yale University Press&mdash;will be
+a major contribution to the literature dealing with Anglo-American
+woodworking tools. Hummel's book will place in perspective Winterthur
+Museum's uniquely documented Dominy Woodshop Collection. This extensive
+collection of tools&mdash;over a thousand in number&mdash;is rich in attributed
+and dated examples which range from the early 18th through the mid-19th
+century. The literature of the subject has been greatly enhanced by the
+English writer, W.L. Goodman. Extending a series of articles that first
+appeared in the <i>Journal of The Institute of Handicraft Teachers</i>,
+Goodman has put together a well-researched <i>History of Woodworking
+Tools</i> (London, 1964), one particularly useful for its wealth of
+illustration from antiquity and the Middle Ages.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Specialization" id="Specialization"></a>Specialization</h3>
+
+<p>Given the limitations of precise dating, uncertain provenance, and an
+uneven literature, what can be learned about woodworking tools after
+1600? In some instances, design change can be noted and documented to
+provide at least a general criteria for dating. Frequently, the original
+appearance of tools can be documented. For some hand tools,
+characteristics can be established that denote a national origin. Not
+infrequently a tool's style, decorative motif, or similarity to other
+objects that coexisted at a given time can suggest, even in relatively
+modern times, the values of the society that produced it. The source of
+such information derived from the hand tool is generally visual,
+recorded in the tool itself or in pictures of it and supported by
+manuscript and printed material.</p>
+
+<p>Survey the principal printed sources of the 17th, 18th, and 19th
+centuries. The first thing that is apparent is a remarkable
+proliferation of tool types without any significant change in the
+definition and description of the carpenter's or joiner's task. Begin in
+1685 with Charles Hoole's translation of Johann Amos Comenius' <i>Orbis
+Sensualium Pictus</i> for use as a Latin grammar. Among the occupations
+chosen to illustrate vocabulary and usage were the carpenter (fig. 1),
+the boxmaker (cabinetmaker), and the turner (fig. 2). "The Carpenter,"
+according to Hoole's text, "squareth Timber with a Chip ax ... and
+saweth it with a Saw" while the more specialized "Box-maker, smootheth
+hewen-Boards with a Plain upon a Work-board, he maketh them very smooth
+with a little plain, he boarth them thorow with an Augre, carveth them
+with a Knife, fasteneth them together with Glew, and Cramp-irons, and
+maketh Tables, Boards, Chests &amp;c." Hoole repeated Comenius' plates with
+the result that the craftsman's tools and his work have the same
+characteristic medieval flavor as the text.<a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a></p>
+
+<p>Joseph Moxon in his well-quoted work on the mechanic arts defined
+joinery as "an Art Manual, whereby several Pieces of Wood are so fitted
+and join'd together by Straight-line, Squares, Miters or any Bevel, that
+they shall seem one intire Piece." Including the workbench, Moxon
+described and illustrated 30 tools (fig. 3) needed by the joiner. The
+carpenter's tools were less favored by illustration; only 13 were
+pictured (fig. 4). The tools that the carpenter used were the same as
+those of the joiner except that the carpenter's tools were structurally
+stronger. The axe serves as a good example of the difference. The
+joiner's axe was light and short handled with the left side of the
+cutting edge bezeled to accommodate one-handed use. The carpenter's axe,
+on the other hand, was intended "to hew great Stuff" and was made deeper
+and heavier to facilitate the squaring and beveling of timbers.<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> By
+mid-18th century the craft of joiner and carpenter had been completely
+rationalized in Diderot's <i>Encyclop&eacute;die</i> and by Andr&eacute; Roubo in his
+<i>L'Art du menuisier</i>, a part of Duhamel's <i>Descriptions des arts et
+m&eacute;tiers</i>. Diderot, for example, illustrates 14 bench planes alone,
+generally used by the joiner (fig. 5), while Roubo suggests the steady
+sophistication of the art in a plate showing the special planes and
+irons required for fine molding and paneling (fig. 6).</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image5a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image5.jpg" width="450" height="633" alt="Figure 5." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 5.&mdash;1769: <span class="smcap">The bench planes of the joiner</span> increased
+in number, but in appearance they remained much the same as those
+illustrated by Moxon. (Denis Diderot, <i>Recueil de planches sur les
+science et les arts lib&eacute;raux</i>, Paris, 1769, vol. 7, &quot;Menuiserie.&quot;
+Smithsonian photo 56630.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>Despite such thoroughness, without the addition of the several plates it
+would be almost impossible to visualize, through the descriptive text
+alone, the work of the carpenter and joiner except, of course, in modern
+terms. This is particularly true of the numerous texts on building, such
+as Batty Langley's <i>The Builder's Complete Assistant</i> (1738) and Francis
+Price's <i>The British Carpenter</i> (1765), where building techniques are
+well described but illustration of tools is omitted. This inadequacy
+grows. In two 19th-century American editions of British works, <i>The Book
+of Trades</i>, printed at Philadelphia in 1807, and Hazen's <i>Panorama of
+the Professions and Trades</i> (1838), the descriptions of the carpenter's
+trade are extremely elementary.</p>
+
+<p>Thomas Martin's <i>Circle of the Mechanical Arts</i> (1813), although far
+more thorough than many texts, still defined carpentry "as the art of
+cutting out, framing, and joining large pieces of wood, to be used in
+building" and joinery as "small work" or what "is called by the French,
+<i>menuiserie</i>." Martin enumerated 16 tools most useful to the carpenter
+and 21 commonly used by the joiner; in summary, he noted, as had Moxon,
+that "both these arts are subservient to architecture, being employed in
+raising, roofing, flooring and ornamenting buildings of all kinds" (fig.
+7).<a name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a></p>
+
+<p>In Peter Nicholson's <i>The Mechanic's Companion</i> (figs. 8, 9, and 10),
+the all-too-familiar definition of carpentry as "the art of employing
+timber in the construction of buildings" suggests very little of the
+carpenter's actual work or the improvement in tool design that had
+occurred since Moxon's <i>Exercises</i>. From Nicholson's list of the tools
+required by the carpenter&mdash;"a ripping saw, a hand saw, an axe, an adze,
+a socket chisel, a firmer chisel, a ripping chisel, an auguer, a gimlet,
+a hammer, a mallet, a pair of pincers, and sometimes planes"&mdash;there
+would seem at first glance slight advance since the 1600's. The
+enumeration of the joiner's tools, however, indicates a considerable
+proliferation, particularly when compared to earlier writers. By the
+early 19th century, the more refined work of joinery required over 50
+tools.</p>
+
+<div class="blockquot"><p class="noin">The bench planes [instructed Nicholson] are, the jack plane, the
+fore plane, the trying plane, the long plane, the jointer, and the
+smoothing plane; the cylindric plane, the compass and forkstaff
+planes; the straight block, for straightening short edges. Rebating
+planes are the moving fillister, the sash fillister, the common
+rebating plane, the side rebating plane. Grooving planes are the
+plough and dado grooving planes. Moulding planes are sinking
+snipebills, side snipebills, beads, hollows and rounds, ovolos and
+ogees. Boring tools are: gimlets, bradawls, stock, and bits.
+Instruments for dividing the wood, are principally the ripping saw,
+the half ripper, the hand saw, the panel saw, the tenon saw, the
+carcase saw, the sash saw, the compass saw, the keyhole saw, and
+turning saw. Tools used for forming the angles of two adjoining
+surfaces, are squares and bevels. Tools used for drawing parallel
+lines are gauges. Edge tools are the firmer chisel, the mortise
+chisel, the socket chisel, the gouge, the hatchet, the adze, the
+drawing knife. Tools for knocking upon wood and iron are, the
+mallet and hammer. Implements for sharpening tools are the grinding
+stone, the rub stone, and the oil or whet stone.<a name="FNanchor_5_5" id="FNanchor_5_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> </p></div>
+
+<p>Reflecting what the text writers listed, toolmakers by the end of the
+18th century gave buyers a wide choice. The catalogue of Sheffield's
+Castle Hill Works offered 20 combinations of ready-stocked tool chests;
+the simplest contained 12 carpenter's tools and the most complex, 39,
+plus, if desired, an additional assortment of gardening implements (fig.
+11). In 1857, the Arrowmammett Works of Middletown, Connecticut,
+producers of bench and molding planes, published an illustrated
+catalogue that offered 34 distinct types that included everything from
+hollows and rounds to double jointers and hand-rail planes (fig.
+12).<a name="FNanchor_6_6" id="FNanchor_6_6"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image6a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image6.jpg" width="450" height="645" alt="Figure 6." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 6.&mdash;1774: <span class="smcap">Andr&eacute; Roubo&#39;s</span> <i>L&#39;Art du menuisier</i>
+contains detailed plates and descriptions of the most specialized of
+woodworking planes: those used to cut panel moldings. The conformation
+of these tools was still distinctly in keeping with the Moxon type and
+suggests that, at least in Europe, no remarkable change had yet occurred
+in the shape of planes. (Andr&eacute;-Jacob Roubo, <i>L&#39;Art du menuisier</i>:
+Troisi&egrave;me partie, troisi&egrave;me section, l&#39;art du menuisier &eacute;b&eacute;niste [Paris,
+1774]. Smithsonian photo 49790-D.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image7a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image7.jpg" width="450" height="609" alt="Figure 7." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 7.&mdash;1813: <span class="smcap">Thomas Martin illustrated on one plate</span>
+the tools of the carpenter and joiner dividing them as follows: the
+tools most useful to the carpenter, the axe (7), adz (6), saw (24),
+socket chisel (13), firmer chisel (5), auger (1), gimlet (3), gauge
+(16), square (9), compass (36), hammer (21), mallet (22), hookpin (11),
+crow (12), plumb rule (18), and level (19); and the tools most often
+associated with joinery, the jack plane (30), trying plane (31),
+smoothing plane (34), tenon saw (25), compass saw (26), keyhole saw
+(27), square (8), bevel (23), gauge (17), mortise chisel (4), gouge
+(14), turnscrew (15), plow plane (29), molding plane (35), pincers (37),
+bradawl (10), stock and bit (2), sidehook (20), workbench (28), and rule
+(38). The planes are of particular interest since they show clearly a
+change in form from those previously illustrated. (Thomas Martin, <i>The
+Circle of the Mechanical Arts</i>, London, 1813.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image8a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image8.jpg" width="450" height="720" alt="Figure 8." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 8.&mdash;1832: <span class="smcap">Peter Nicholson illustrated</span> an
+interesting mixture of old and new forms. An updating of Moxon,
+Nicholson&#39;s carpenter required an axe (1), adz (2), socket chisel (3),
+mortise and tenon gauge (4), square (5), plumb rule (6), level (7),
+auger (8), hookpin (9), and crow (10). (Peter Nicholson, <i>The Mechanic&#39;s
+Companion</i>. 1st American ed., Philadelphia, 1832. Smithsonian photo
+56633.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image9a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image9.jpg" width="450" height="725" alt="Figure 9." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 9.&mdash;1832: <span class="smcap">The workbench delineated by Nicholson</span>
+was little improved over Moxon&#39;s, although the planes&mdash;jack (1), trying
+plane (2), smoothing plane (3), sash fillister (7), and plow
+(8)&mdash;followed the form seen in Martin (fig. 7). The inception of this
+shape occurred in the shops of Sheffield toolmakers in the last half of
+the 18th century, and it persisted until replaced by metallic versions
+patented by American innovators during the last quarter of the 19th
+century. (Nicholson, <i>The Mechanic&#39;s Companion</i>. Smithsonian photo
+56631.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image10a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image10.jpg" width="450" height="687" alt="Figure 10." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 10.&mdash;1832: <span class="smcap">The brace and bit, gimlet, chisels, and
+saws</span>, having achieved a standard form distinctly different than those of
+Moxon&#39;s vintage, were, like the plane, slow to change. The metallic
+version of the brace did not replace the standard Sheffield type (1) in
+the United States until after 1850. For all intent and purpose the saw
+still retains the characteristics illustrated in Nicholson. Of interest
+is Nicholson&#39;s comment regarding the saws; namely, that the double
+handle was peculiar to the hand (6) and tenon saws (7), while the
+compass (9) and the sash saws (8) had the single handle. In addition the
+tenon saw was generally backed in iron and the sash saw in brass.
+(Nicholson, <i>The Mechanic&#39;s Companion</i>. Smithsonian photo 56632.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image11a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image11.jpg" width="450" height="369" alt="Figure 11." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 11.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Early 19th century: The advertisements of
+toolmakers</span> indicated the diversity of production. The Castle Hill Works
+at Sheffield offered to gentlemen 20 choices of tool chests designed to
+appeal to a wide variety of users and purses. The chest was available in
+either oak or mahogany, depending on the gentleman&#39;s tastes (fig. 49).
+(Book 87, Cutler and Company, Castle Hill Works, Sheffield. <i>Courtesy of
+the Victoria and Albert Museum.</i>)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image12.jpg" width="450" height="705" alt="Figure 12." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 12.&mdash;1857: <span class="smcap">The diversity of tools</span> available to
+buyers made necessary the illustrated trade catalogue. Although few in
+number in the United States before 1850, tool catalogues became
+voluminous in the last half of the century as printing costs dropped.
+(Smithsonian Institution Library. Smithsonian photo 49790.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>American inventories reflect the great increase suggested by the early
+technical writers and trade catalogues cited above. Compare the content
+of two American carpenters' shops&mdash;one of 1709, in York County,
+Virginia, and the other of 1827, in Middleborough, Massachusetts. John
+Crost, a Virginian, owned, in addition to sundry shoemaking and
+agricultural implements, a dozen gimlets, chalklines, bung augers, a
+dozen turning tools and mortising chisels, several dozen planes (ogees,
+hollows and rounds, and plows), several augers, a pair of 2-foot rules,
+a spoke shave, lathing hammers, a lock saw, three files, compasses,
+paring chisels, a jointer's hammer, three handsaws, filling axes, a
+broad axe, and two adzes. Nearly 120 years later Amasa Thompson listed
+his tools and their value. Thompson's list is a splendid comparison of
+the tools needed in actual practice, as opposed to the tools suggested
+by Nicholson in his treatise on carpentry or those shown in the
+catalogues of the toolmakers.<a name="FNanchor_7_7" id="FNanchor_7_7"></a><a href="#Footnote_7_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> Thompson listed the following:</p>
+
+
+<div class='center'>
+<table class='tb1' border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="">
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>set bench planes</td>
+ <td align='right'>$6.00</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Broad Axe</td>
+ <td align='right'>3.00</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Adze</td>
+ <td align='right'>2.25</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Panel saw</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Panel saw</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.58</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>fine do&mdash;</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.58</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Drawing knife</td>
+ <td align='right'>.46</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Trying square</td>
+ <td align='right'>.93</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Shingling hatchet</td>
+ <td align='right'>.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Hammer</td>
+ <td align='right'>.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Rabbet plane</td>
+ <td align='right'>.83</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Halving do</td>
+ <td align='right'>.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Backed fine saw</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.25</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Inch augre</td>
+ <td align='right'>.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>pr. dividers or compasses&mdash;</td>
+ <td align='right'>.71</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Panel saw for splitting</td>
+ <td align='right'>2.75</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Tennon gauge</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.42</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Bevel</td>
+ <td align='right'>.84</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Bradd Hammer</td>
+ <td align='right'>.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'><i>Architect Book</i></td>
+ <td align='right'>6.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Case Mathematical Instruments</td>
+ <td align='right'>3.62-<span class="above">1</span>&#8260;<span class="below">2</span></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Panel saw</td>
+ <td align='right'>2.75</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Grafting saw</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.00</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Bench screw</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.00</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Stamp</td>
+ <td align='right'>2.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Double joint rule</td>
+ <td align='right'>.62-<span class="above">1</span>&#8260;<span class="below">2</span></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Sash saw</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.12-<span class="above">1</span>&#8260;<span class="below">2</span></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Oil Can</td>
+ <td align='right'>.17</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Brace &amp; 36 straw cold bits</td>
+ <td align='right'>9.00</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Window Frame tool</td>
+ <td align='right'>4.00</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Blind tool</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.33</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Glue Kettle</td>
+ <td align='right'>.62-<span class="above">1</span>&#8260;<span class="below">2</span></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Grindstone without crank</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.75</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Machine for whetting saws</td>
+ <td align='right'>.75</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Tennoning machine</td>
+ <td align='right'>4.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left' colspan='2'>Drafting board and square Bevel&mdash;</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.25</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Noseing sash plane with templets &amp; copes</td>
+ <td align='right'>4.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>pr. clamps for clamping doors</td>
+ <td align='right'>2.17</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Set Bench Planes&mdash;double irons.&mdash;</td>
+ <td align='right'>7.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Grindstone 300 lbs @</td>
+ <td align='right'>6.25</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Stove for shop&mdash;$7.25, one elbow .37 &amp; 40</td>
+ <td align='right'>&nbsp;</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>&nbsp;</td>
+ <td align='left'>lbs second hand pipe $4.00</td>
+ <td align='right'>11.62</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Bed moulding</td>
+ <td align='right'>2.00</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Pr. shears for cutting tin.&mdash;</td>
+ <td align='right'>.17</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Morticing Machine</td>
+ <td align='right'>10.75</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Grecian Ovilo</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.13</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1-<span class="above">3</span>&#8260;<span class="below">16</span></td>
+ <td align='left'>beed</td>
+ <td align='right'>.67</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Spirit level</td>
+ <td align='right'>2.25</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Oil stone</td>
+ <td align='right'>.42</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Small trying square</td>
+ <td align='right'>.48</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>pareing chisel</td>
+ <td align='right'>.37</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Screw driver</td>
+ <td align='right'>.29</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Bench screw</td>
+ <td align='right'>.75</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Box rule</td>
+ <td align='right'>.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1-<span class="above">3</span>&#8260;<span class="below">4</span></td>
+ <td align='left'>Augre</td>
+ <td align='right'>.41</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>11</td>
+ <td align='left'>Gouges</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.19</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>13</td>
+ <td align='left'>Chisels</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.17</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>small iron vice</td>
+ <td align='right'>.52</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>pr. Hollow Rounds</td>
+ <td align='right'>.86</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>4</td>
+ <td align='left'>Framing chisels</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.05</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Grove plough &amp; Irons&mdash;Sold at 4.50</td>
+ <td align='right'>5.00</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Sash plane for 1-<span class="above">1</span>&#8260;<span class="below">4</span> stuff</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Copeing plane</td>
+ <td align='right'>.67</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Bead <span class="above">1</span>&#8260;<span class="below">4</span>&mdash;</td>
+ <td align='right'>.75</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Bead <span class="above">3</span>&#8260;<span class="below">4</span></td>
+ <td align='right'>1.00</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Rabbet (Sold at .92)</td>
+ <td align='right'>.92</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Smooth plane</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Strike Block</td>
+ <td align='right'>.92</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Compass saw</td>
+ <td align='right'>.42</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>6</td>
+ <td align='left'>Gauges</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.83</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Dust brush</td>
+ <td align='right'>.25</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Rasp, or wood file</td>
+ <td align='right'>.25</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Augre 2 in.</td>
+ <td align='right'>.76</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Augre 1 in.</td>
+ <td align='right'>.40</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Do <span class="above">3</span>&#8260;<span class="below">4</span></td>
+ <td align='right'>.30</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Spoke shave</td>
+ <td align='right'>.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Bevel&mdash;</td>
+ <td align='right'>.25</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Box rule</td>
+ <td align='right'>.84</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Iron square</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.42</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Box rule</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.25</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Spur Rabbet (Sold&mdash;1.17)</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.33</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Pannel plane</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.25</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Sash plane</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.25</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>pr. Match planes</td>
+ <td align='right'>2.25</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Two inch chisel or firmer&mdash;</td>
+ <td align='right'>.42</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Morticing chisel <span class="above">3</span>&#8260;<span class="below">8</span></td>
+ <td align='right'>.25</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Large screw driver</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.00</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Pr. small clamps</td>
+ <td align='right'>.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>pr. Spring dividers</td>
+ <td align='right'>.92</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>do-nippers</td>
+ <td align='right'>.20</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Morticing chisel <span class="above">1</span>&#8260;<span class="below">2</span> in.</td>
+ <td align='right'>.28</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Ovilo &amp; Ostrigal <span class="above">3</span>&#8260;<span class="below">4</span>&mdash;</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.25</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Scotia &amp; Ostrigal <span class="above">5</span>&#8260;<span class="below">8</span>&mdash;</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.08</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Noseing&mdash;</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.08</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Pr. Hollow &amp; rounds</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.33</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Ogee&mdash; <span class="above">1</span>&#8260;<span class="below">2</span> inch</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.00</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Ostrigal <span class="above">7</span>&#8260;<span class="below">8</span> inch</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.00</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Bit&mdash;</td>
+ <td align='right'>.15</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Beed <span class="above">1</span>&#8260;<span class="below">2</span> inch</td>
+ <td align='right'>.83</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Claw hammer</td>
+ <td align='right'>.67</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Fillister</td>
+ <td align='right'>2.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>2</td>
+ <td align='left'>Beeds at <span class="above">5</span>&#8260;<span class="below">8</span></td>
+ <td align='right'>1.83</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Pair Quirk tools</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Side Rabbet plane</td>
+ <td align='right'>.83</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Large steel tongued sq.</td>
+ <td align='right'>1.71</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Saw &amp; Pad</td>
+ <td align='right'>.67</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>pr. fire stones</td>
+ <td align='right'>.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>small trying sq.</td>
+ <td align='right'>.50</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Set Bench planes double ironed without smooth plane</td>
+ <td align='right'>6.00</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+ <td align='left'>1</td>
+ <td align='left'>Bench screw</td>
+ <td align='right'>.75</td>
+</tr>
+</table></div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image13.jpg" width="450" height="818" alt="Figure 13." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 13.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Early 18th century</span>: In addition to their
+special function and importance as survivals documenting an outmoded
+technology, the hand tool often combines a gracefulness of line and a
+sense of proportion that makes it an object of great decorative appeal.
+The dividers of the builder or shipwright illustrated here are of French
+origin and may be valued as much for their cultural significance as for
+their technical importance. (Smithsonian photo 49792-G.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>By 1900, the carpenter's tool chest, fully stocked and fit for the
+finest craftsman, contained 90 or more tools. Specialization is readily
+apparent; the change in, and achievement of, the ultimate design of a
+specific tool is not so easily pinpointed. Only by comparing
+illustrations and surviving examples can such an evolution be
+appreciated and in the process, whether pondering the metamorphosis of a
+plane, a brace and bit, or an auger, the various stages of change
+encountered coincide with the rise of modern industrial society.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image14.jpg" width="450" height="853" alt="Figure 14." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 14.&mdash;1688: <span class="smcap">Frontispiece From John Brown</span>, <i>The
+Description and Use of the Carpenter&#39;s Rule</i>, London, 1688. (Library of
+Congress.)</span>
+</div>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Configuration" id="Configuration"></a>Configuration</h3>
+
+<p>Hand tools are often neglected in the search for the pleasing objects of
+the past. Considered too utilitarian, their decorative appeal&mdash;the
+mellow patina of the wood plane or the delicately tapered legs of a pair
+of dividers&mdash;often goes unnoticed. Surprisingly modern in design, the
+ancient carpenter's or cabinetmaker's tool has a vitality of line that
+can, without reference to technical significance, make it an object of
+considerable grace and beauty. The hand tool is frequently a lively and
+decorative symbol of a society at a given time&mdash;a symbol, which,
+according to the judges at London's Crystal Palace Exhibition in 1851,
+gives "indications of the peculiar condition and habits of the people
+whence they come, of their social and industrial wants and aims, as well
+as their natural or acquired advantages."<a name="FNanchor_8_8" id="FNanchor_8_8"></a><a href="#Footnote_8_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> The hand tool, therefore,
+should be considered both as an object of appealing shape and a document
+illustrative of society and its progress.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image15.jpg" width="450" height="905" alt="Figure 15." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 15.&mdash;<span class="smcap">18th century</span>: Cabinetmaker&#39;s dividers of
+English origin. (Private collection. Smithsonian photo 49789-B.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image16.jpg" width="450" height="502" alt="Figure 16." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 16.&mdash;1783: <span class="smcap">Cabinetmaker&#39;s</span> dividers of English
+manufacture, dated, and marked T. Pearmain. See detail, figure 17.
+(Smithsonian photo 49792-C.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image17.jpg" width="450" height="97" alt="Figure 17." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 17.&mdash;1783: <span class="smcap">Detail of cabinetmaker&#39;s dividers</span>
+showing name and date.</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image18.jpg" width="450" height="618" alt="Figure 18." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 18.&mdash;<span class="smcap">18th century</span>: Carpenter&#39;s dividers of English
+origin, undated. (Smithsonian photo 49792-B.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>On first sight, it is the conformation rather than any facet of its
+technical or social significance that strikes the eye; perhaps the most
+decorative of tools are early dividers and calipers which, prior to
+their standardization, existed in seemingly endless variety. The great
+dividers used by the shipbuilder and architect for scribing and
+measuring timbers not only indicate building techniques (accession
+61.548) but also document 17th-and early 18th-century decorative
+metalwork, as seen in figure 13. Well before the 17th century, artists
+and engravers recognized them as intriguing shapes to include in any
+potpourri of instruments, either in cartouches or the frontispieces of
+books (fig. 14).</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image19.jpg" width="450" height="538" alt="Figure 19." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 19.&mdash;1855: <span class="smcap">The frontispiece from Edward Shaw</span>, <i>The
+Modern Architect</i> (Boston, 1855), shows the carpenter&#39;s dividers in the
+foreground unchanged in form from those illustrated in figure 18. Of
+further interest in Shaw&#39;s plate is the dress of the workmen and the
+balloon frame of the house under construction. (Smithsonian photo
+49792-A.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>The two pairs of cabinetmaker's dividers illustrated in figures 15 and
+16 suggest significant changes in the design of a basic tool. The
+dividers shown in figure 15 are English and would seem to be of early
+18th-century origin, perhaps even earlier. They are Renaissance in
+feeling with decorated legs and a heart-shaped stop on the end of the
+slide-arm. In character, they are like the great dividers shown in
+figure 13: functional, but at the same time preserving in their
+decoration the features common to a wide variety of ironwork and wares
+beyond the realm of tools alone. The dividers pictured in figure 16 are
+a decided contrast. Dated 1783, they are strongly suggestive of
+Sheffield origin. Gone is the superfluous decoration; in its place is
+the strong, crisp line of a tool that has reached nearly the ultimate of
+function and manufacture, a device which both in general appearance and
+precise design is very modern in execution. Equally intriguing are the
+smaller, more slender dividers (accession 319557) of the 18th-century
+house-builder as seen in figure 18, a form that changed very little, if
+at all, until after 1850&mdash;a fact confirmed by the frontispiece of Edward
+Shaw's <i>The Modern Architect</i>, published in Boston in 1855 (fig. 19).
+The double calipers of the woodturner (fig. 20) have by far the most
+appealing and ingenious design of all such devices. Designed for
+convenience, few tools illustrate better the aesthetic of the purely
+functional than this pair of 19th-century American calipers.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image20.jpg" width="450" height="593" alt="Figure 20." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 20.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Early 19th century: The double calipers</span> of
+the woodturner permitted double readings to be taken without changing
+the set of the tool. Inherent in this practical design is a gracefulness
+of line seldom surpassed. (Private collection. Smithsonian photo
+49793-C.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 500px;">
+<img src="images/image21.jpg" width="500" height="194" alt="Figure 21." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 21.&mdash;1704: <span class="smcap">The floor plane or long joiner</span> of
+Norwegian origin exhibits the characteristic decoration of the stock and
+mouth, patterns common on tools of northern European and Scandinavian
+origin. (<i>Courtesy of the Norsk Folkemuseum, Oslo, Norway.</i>)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>Intended to establish proportion and to insure precision, it seems a
+natural consequence that dividers and calipers should in themselves
+reflect the same sense of balance and grace that they were designed to
+govern. Still, even the most prosaic examples of woodworking tools,
+completely divorced from the quasi-mathematical devices of measure and
+proportion, have this quality and can be admired solely as decorative
+objects. This is most evident in the three European bench planes
+illustrated in figures 21, 22, and 23: one Norwegian, dated 1704; one
+Dutch (accession 319562), dated 1756; and one German, dated 1809. The
+Norwegian and German examples, with their elaborately carved bodies and
+heart-shaped mouths, are typical of the type that Swedish and German
+colonists in America might have used in the 17th and 18th centuries.
+They are important for that reason. Also, all three exhibit elaboration
+found on other material survivals from these countries in their
+respective periods. For example, the incised rosette of the Dutch plane
+(fig. 22) is especially suggestive of the rosettes found on English and
+American furniture of the 1750's and 1760's, specifically on high
+chests.</p>
+
+<p>The decorative motifs that characterized European tools of the 17th and
+18th centuries obscured technical improvement. By contrast, in England
+and America, tools gained distinction through the directness of their
+design. Following English patterns, tools of American make were
+straightforward. Only later, in new tool types, did they imitate the
+rococo flourish of their European predecessors. In America, as in
+England, the baroque for things functional seemingly had little appeal.
+This is particularly true of woodworking planes on which, unlike their
+continental cousins, embellishment is rarely seen. Exemplifying this
+tradition are three early 19th-century American planes: a plow, for
+cutting channels of various widths on board edges, marked "G. White,
+Phild<sup>a</sup>" (fig. 24); a rabbet, for notching the margin of boards; made
+by E.W. Carpenter of Lancaster, Pennsylvania (fig. 25); and a jack or
+foreplane, for rough surfacing (accession 61.547), made by A. Klock and
+dated 1818 as seen in figure 26.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image22.jpg" width="450" height="218" alt="Figure 22." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 22.&mdash;1756: <span class="smcap">The highly</span> elaborated stock and
+rosette-incised wedge of the smoothing plane recall the decoration on
+furniture of the period. The plane is of Dutch origin. (Smithsonian
+photo 49792-F.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image23.jpg" width="450" height="381" alt="Figure 23." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 23.&mdash;1809: <span class="smcap">This bench plane</span> of German origin is
+dated 1809. It is of a traditional form that persists to the present
+day. The planes pictured in figures 21, 22, and 23 are similar to the
+type brought to North America by non-English colonists. (Private
+collection. Smithsonian photo 49793-F.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image24.jpg" width="450" height="419" alt="Figure 24." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 24.&mdash;<span class="smcap">About 1818:</span> This plow plane, used to cut
+narrow channels on the edges of boards, was made by G. White of
+Philadelphia in the early 19th century. It is essentially the same tool
+depicted in the catalogues of Sheffield manufactures and in the plates
+from Martin and Nicholson. The pattern of the basic bench tools used in
+America consistently followed British design, at least until the last
+quarter of the 19th century. (Private collection. Smithsonian photo
+49794-E.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image25.jpg" width="450" height="316" alt="Figure 25." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 25. <span class="smcap">1830&ndash;1840: The design</span> of the rabbet plane,
+used to cut a groove of fixed width and depth on the edge of a board,
+was not improved upon in the 19th century. The carpenter&#39;s dependence on
+this tool lessened only after the perfection of multipurpose metallic
+planes that could be readily converted to cut a &quot;rabbet.&quot; (Private
+collection. Smithsonian photo 494789-H).</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>The question of dating arises, since only the Klock piece is firmly
+fixed. How, for example, is the early 19th-century attribution arrived
+at for the planes inscribed White and Carpenter? First, the nature of
+the stamped name "G. White" is of proper character for the period.
+Second, G. White is listed in the Philadelphia city directories as a
+"plane-maker" between the years 1818 and 1820, working at the back of 5
+Filbert Street and later at 34 Juliana Street. Third, internal evidence
+on the plane itself gives a clue. In this case, the hardware&mdash;rivets and
+furrels&mdash;is similar if not identical to that found on firearms of the
+period, weapons whose dates of manufacture are known. The decorative
+molding on the fence of this plane is proper for the period; this is not
+a reliable guide, however, since similar moldings are retained
+throughout the century. Finally, the plane is equipped with a fence
+controlled by slide-arms, fixed with wedges and not by adjustable screw
+arms. After 1830, tools of high quality, such as White's, invariably
+have the screw arms. The rabbet plane, made by Carpenter, is traceable
+via another route, the U.S. Patent Office records. Carpenter,
+self-designated "toolmaker of Lancaster," submitted patents for the
+improvement of wood planes between 1831 and 1849. Examples of
+Carpenter's work, always stamped as shown in figure 27, survive, both
+dated and undated. There are several of his planes in the collections of
+the Bucks County Historical Society, and dated pieces are known in
+private collections.</p>
+
+<p>Inherent in the bench planes is a feeling of motion, particularly in the
+plow and the rabbet where basic design alone conveys the idea that they
+were meant to move over fixed surfaces. Of the three examples, only the
+brass tippings and setscrew of the plow plane suggest any enrichment,
+and of course these were not intended for decoration; in later years,
+however, boxwood, fruitwood, and even ivory tips were added to the more
+expensive factory models. Also unintentional, but pleasing, is the
+distinctive throat of the rabbet plane&mdash;a design that developed to
+permit easy discharge of shavings, and one that mass manufacture did
+not destroy.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image26.jpg" width="450" height="225" alt="Figure 26." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 26.&mdash;1818: <span class="smcap">The jack plane</span>, used first by the
+carpenter for rapid surfacing, is distinguished primarily by the bezeled
+and slightly convex edge of its cutting iron. As with the plow and the
+rabbet, its shape is ubiquitous. Dated and marked A. Klock, this
+American example follows precisely those detailed in Sheffield pattern
+books. (Smithsonian photo 49794-C.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image27.jpg" width="450" height="401" alt="Figure 27." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 27.&mdash;1830&ndash;1840: <span class="smcap">Detail of</span> the rabbet plane (fig.
+25) showing the characteristic stamp of E.W. Carpenter. (Smithsonian
+photo 49794-D.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image28.jpg" width="450" height="551" alt="Figure 28." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 28.&mdash;<span class="smcap">About 1631: The preceding illustrations</span>
+emphasize the divergent appearance of European and Anglo-American tools.
+This, however, was not always the case. The woodworker&#39;s shop by the
+Dutch engraver Jan Van Vliet suggests the similarity between English and
+European tool types in the 17th century. Note in particular the planes,
+axe, brace, and auger as compared to Moxon. (Library of Congress,
+Division of Prints and Photographs.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image29.jpg" width="450" height="608" alt="Figure 29." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 29.&mdash;1690: <span class="smcap">The cabinetmaker&#39;s shop</span> from Elias
+Pozelius, <i>Orbus Pictus nach Zeichnugen der Susanna Maria Sandrart</i>,
+N&uuml;rnberg, 1690. (Library of Congress.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 400px;">
+<img src="images/image30.jpg" width="400" height="523" alt="Figure 30." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 30.&mdash;1568: <span class="smcap">The woodworker&#39;s shop</span> from Hans Sachs,
+<i>Eygentliche Beschrerbung Aller Stande ... mit Kunstreichen Figuren</i> [by
+Jost Amman], Frankfurt, 1568. (Library of Congress.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>The divergence from European to an Anglo-American hand-tool design and
+the approximate date that it occurred can be suggested by a comparison
+of contemporary illustrations. The change in the wooden bench plane can
+be followed from the early 17th century through its standardization at
+the end of the 18th century. Examine first the planes as drawn in the
+1630's by the Dutchman Jan Van Vliet (fig. 28), an etcher of Rembrandt's
+school at Leiden, and also the examples illustrated by Porzelius (fig.
+29) and by Jost Amman (fig. 30). Compare them to Moxon's plate (fig. 31)
+from the <i>Mechanick Exercises</i> (3rd ed., 1703) and to the splendid
+drawing of the bench plane from Andr&eacute;-Jacob Roubo's <i>L'Art du
+menuisier</i>, published in 1769 (fig. 32). In all of them, the rounded
+handle, or tote, and the fore-horn appear, characteristics of both
+European and English planes of the period before 1750. The similarity
+ends with the mass production of hand tools from the shops of the
+English toolmaking centers, principally Sheffield. An illustration from
+a pattern and design book of the Castle Hill Works, Sheffield, dating
+from the last quarter of the 18th century (fig. 33), shows the achieved,
+familiar form of the bench planes, as well as other tools. The use of
+this form in America is readily documented in Lewis Miller's
+self-portrait while working at his trade in York, Pennsylvania, in 1810
+(fig. 34) and by the shop sign carved by Isaac Fowle in 1820 for John
+Bradford (fig. 35). In each example, the bench plane clearly follows the
+English prototype.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 400px;">
+<img src="images/image31.jpg" width="400" height="708" alt="Figure 31." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 31.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1703: Detail of the bench planes</span> from Moxon&#39;s
+<i>Mechanick Exercises</i>.</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image32a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image32.jpg" width="450" height="658" alt="Figure 32." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 32.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1769: Andr&eacute;-Jacob Roubo&#39;s precise rendering</span>
+of the bench plane retains the essential features shown by Moxon&mdash;the
+rounded tote or handle and the curved fore-horn. (Andr&eacute;-Jacob Roubo,
+<i>L&#39;Art du menuisier</i>, 1769.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image33.jpg" width="450" height="308" alt="Figure 33." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 33.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Early 19th century:</span> The bench plane
+illustrated in Roubo or Moxon is seldom seen in American tool
+collections. The bench planes, smoothing planes, rabbets, and plows
+universally resemble those shown in this illustration from the pattern
+book of the Castle Hill Works, Sheffield. (Book 87, Cutler and Company,
+Castle Hill Works, Sheffield. <i>Courtesy of the Victoria and Albert
+Museum.</i>)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image34a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image34.jpg" width="450" height="316" alt="Figure 34." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 34.&mdash;<span class="smcap">About 1810: Lewis Miller working at his bench</span>
+in York, Pa. In a predominantly Pennsylvania-German settlement, the
+plane used by Miller conforms to the Sheffield type illustrated in the
+catalogue of the Castle Hill Works as shown in figure 33. (York County
+Historical Society, York, Pa.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image35.jpg" width="450" height="249" alt="Figure 35." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 35.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1820: John Bradford&#39;s</span> shop sign carved by
+Isaac Fowle is a unique documentary of early 19th-century tool shapes
+and is in the Bostonian Society, Boston, Mass. (Index of American
+Design, The National Gallery, Washington, D.C.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figleft" style="width: 250px;">
+<img src="images/image36.jpg" width="250" height="478" alt="Figure 36." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 36.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1703: The joiner&#39;s</span> brace and bit&mdash;a detail
+from Moxon, <i>Mechanick Exercises</i> ..., London, 1703. (Library of
+Congress, Smithsonian photo 56635.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figright" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image37.jpg" width="450" height="329" alt="Figure 37." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 37.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1769: Roubo&#39;s illustration of the brace</span> and
+bit differs from Moxon&#39;s only in the precision of the delineation.
+Contrast this form with that of the standard Sheffield version in figure
+38 and the metallic braces illustrated in figures 40 through 44. From
+these plates can be seen the progression of the bitstock toward its
+ultimate perfection in the late 19th century. (Andr&eacute;-Jacob Roubo,<i> L&#39;Art
+du menuisier</i>, 1769.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image38.jpg" width="450" height="236" alt="Figure 38." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 38.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Early 19th century: The mass-produced version</span>
+of the wooden brace and bit took the form illustrated in Book 87 of
+Cutler&#39;s Castle Hill Works. (<i>Courtesy of the Victoria and Albert
+Museum.</i>)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image39.jpg" width="450" height="286" alt="Figure 39." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 39.&mdash;<span class="smcap">18th century: The transitional form</span> of the
+wooden brace and bit incorporated the overall shape of the mass-produced
+version but retained the archaic method of fastening the bit to the
+chuck. The tool is of Dutch origin and suggests the influence of
+Sheffield design on European tools. (Smithsonian photo 49792-E.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image40.jpg" width="450" height="650" alt="Figure 40." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 40.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1769: Roubo illustrated the metallic brace</span>
+and, in addition, suggested its use as a screwdriver. (Andr&eacute;-Jacob
+Roubo, <i>L&#39;Art du menuisier</i>,1769.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image41.jpg" width="450" height="275" alt="Figure 41." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 41.&mdash;<span class="smcap">About 1775: Ford, Whitmore and Brunton</span> made
+and sold clockmaker&#39;s braces of metal with a sweep and shank that was
+imitated by American patentees in the 19th century. (Catalogue of Ford,
+Whitmore and Brunton, Birmingham, England. <i>Courtesy of the Birmingham
+Reference Library.</i>)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image42.jpg" width="450" height="258" alt="Figure 42." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 42.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1852: Nearly one hundred years</span> after Roubo&#39;s
+plate appeared, Jacob Switzer applied for a patent for an &quot;Improved Self
+Holding Screw Driver.&quot; The similarity of Switzer&#39;s drawing and Roubo&#39;s
+plate is striking. (Original patent drawing 9,457, U.S. Patent Office,
+Record Group 241, the National Archives.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figleft" style="width: 250px;">
+<img src="images/image43.jpg" width="250" height="667" alt="Figure 43." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 43.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1866: The simplicity and strength</span> of the
+brace proposed by J. Parker Gordon is in sharp contrast to the heavily
+splinted sides of the wooden brace commonly used in mid-19th-century
+America. (Original patent drawing 52,042, U.S. Patent Office, Record
+Group 241, the National Archives.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figright" style="width: 400px;">
+<img src="images/image44.jpg" width="400" height="265" alt="Figure 44." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 44.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1865: Milton nobles&#39; patent</span> perfecting the
+chuck which held the auger bit was an important step along the path
+which led ultimately to the complete acceptance of the metallic brace.
+Barber&#39;s ratchet brace shown in figure 66 completes the metamorphosis of
+this tool form in the United States. (Original patent drawing 51,660,
+U.S. Patent Office, Record Group 241, the National Archives.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>The carpenter's brace is another instance of divergent design after a
+common origin. Refer again to Van Vliet's etching of the woodworker's
+shop (fig. 28), to the detail from Moxon (fig. 36), and from Roubo (fig.
+37). All show the brace in a form familiar since the Middle Ages, a
+shape common to both delineators and craftsmen of the Continent and the
+British Isles. But, as the plane changed, so changed the brace. The
+standard form of this tool as it was used and produced in the United
+States in the 19th century can be seen in another plate from the
+catalogue of the Castle Hill Works at Sheffield (fig. 38). This English
+influence on American tool design is no surprise, since as early as 1634
+William Wood in <i>New England's Prospect</i> suggested that colonists take
+to the New World "All manner of Ironwares, as all manner of nailes for
+houses ... with Axes both broad and pitching ... All manners of Augers,
+piercing bits, Whip-saws, Two handed saws, Froes ..., rings for Bettle
+heads, and Iron-wedges."</p>
+
+<div class="figright" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image45.jpg" width="450" height="163" alt="Figure 45." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 45.&mdash;<span class="smcap">19th century: The upholsterer&#39;s hammer</span> is an
+unknown; it is not dated, its maker is anonymous, as is its user. It is
+of American origin, yet of a style that might have been used in England
+or on the Continent. This lack of provenance need not detract from its
+significance as a material survival. This hammer, the brace (fig. 46),
+the bevel (fig. 47), and the compass saw (fig. 48) are sufficiently
+provocative in their design to conjure some image of a technology
+dependent upon the skilled hand of craftsmen working in wood and of the
+relationship between the hand, the tool, and the finished product.
+(Smithsonian photo 49793-A.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figright" style="width: 250px;">
+<img src="images/image46.jpg" width="250" height="497" alt="Figure 46." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 46.&mdash;<span class="smcap">18th century: The brace and bit</span> in its
+nonfactory form conforms to a general design pattern in which none of
+the components are ever precisely alike. This aspect of variety of
+detail&mdash;sophistication, crudeness, decorative qualities or the
+like&mdash;reflects something of the individuality of the toolmaker, a
+quality completely lost in the standardization of the carpenter&#39;s brace.
+(Smithsonian photo 49794-A.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>English tool design in the 18th century also influenced the continental
+toolmakers. This can be seen in figure 39 in a transitional-type
+bitstock (accession 319556) from the Low Countries. Adopting an English
+shape, but still preserving the ancient lever device for holding the bit
+in place, the piece with its grapevine embellishment is a marked
+contrast to the severely functional brass chucks on braces of English
+manufacture. No less a contrast are metallic versions of the brace.
+These begin to appear with some regularity in the U.S. patent
+specifications of the 1840's; their design is apparently derived from
+18th-century precedents. Roubo (fig. 40) illustrated a metal bitstock in
+1769, as did Ford, Whitmore &amp; Brunton, makers of jewelers' and
+watchmakers' tools, of Birmingham, England, in their trade catalogue of
+1775 (fig. 41). Each suggests a prototype of the patented forms of the
+1840's. For example, in 1852, Jacob Switzer of Basil, Ohio, suggested,
+as had Roubo a hundred years earlier, that the bitstock be used as a
+screwdriver (fig. 42); but far more interesting than Switzer's idea was
+his delineation of the brace itself, which he described as "an ordinary
+brace and bit stock" (U.S. pat. 9,457). The inference is that such a
+tool form was already a familiar one among the woodworking trades in the
+United States. Disregarding the screwdriver attachment, which is not
+without merit, Switzer's stock represents an accurate rendering of what
+was then a well-known form if not as yet a rival of the older wooden
+brace. Likewise, J. Parker Gordon's patent 52,042 of 1866 exemplifies
+the strengthening of a basic tool by the use of iron (fig. 43) and, as a
+result, the achievement of an even greater functionalism in design. The
+complete break with the medieval, however, is seen in a drawing
+submitted to the Commissioner of Patents in 1865 (pat. 51,660) by Milton
+V. Nobles of Rochester, New York.<a name="FNanchor_9_9" id="FNanchor_9_9"></a><a href="#Footnote_9_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> Nobles' creation was of thoroughly
+modern design and appearance in which, unlike earlier types, the bit was
+held in place by a solid socket, split sleeve, and a tightening ring
+(fig. 44). In three centuries, three distinct design changes occurred in
+the carpenter's brace. First, about 1750, the so-called English or
+Sheffield bitstock appeared. This was followed in the very early 19th
+century by the reinforced English type whose sides were splinted by
+brass strips. Not only had the medieval form largely disappeared by the
+end of the 18th century, but so had the ancient lever-wedge method of
+fastening the bit in the stock, a device replaced by the pressure-spring
+button on the side of the chuck. Finally, in this evolution, came the
+metallic stock, not widely used in America until after the Civil War,
+that embodied in its design the influence of mass manufacture and in its
+several early versions all of the features of the modern brace and bit.</p>
+
+<div class="figleft" style="width: 400px;">
+<img src="images/image47.jpg" width="400" height="244" alt="Figure 47." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 47.&mdash;<span class="smcap">18th century:</span> The visually pleasing qualities
+of walnut and brass provide a level of response to this joiner&#39;s bevel
+quite apart from its technical significance. (Private collection.
+Smithsonian photo 49793-B.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image48.jpg" width="450" height="113" alt="Figure 48." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 48.&mdash;<span class="smcap">18th century: The handle of the compass saw</span>,
+characteristically Dutch in shape, is an outstanding example of a
+recurring functional design, one which varied according to the hand of
+the sawer. (Smithsonian photo 49789-C.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>Henry Ward Beecher, impressed by the growing sophistication of the
+toolmakers, described the hand tool in a most realistic and objective
+manner as an "extension of a man's hand." The antiquarian, attuned to
+more subjective and romantic appraisals, will find this hardly
+sufficient. Look at the upholsterer's hammer (accession 61.35) seen in
+figure 45: there is no question that it is a response to a demanding
+task that required an efficient and not too forceful extension of the
+workman's hand. But there is another response to this implement: namely,
+the admiration for an unknown toolmaker who combined in an elementary
+striking tool a hammerhead of well-weighted proportion to be wielded
+gently through the medium of an extremely delicate handle. In short,
+here is an object about whose provenance one need know very little in
+order to enjoy it aesthetically. In a like manner, the 18th-century
+bitstock of Flemish origin (fig. 46), the English cabinetmaker's bevel
+of the same century (fig. 47), and the compass saw (accession 61.52,
+fig. 48) capture in their basic design something beyond the functional
+extension of the craftsman's hand. The slow curve of the bitstock, never
+identical from one early example to another, is lost in later
+factory-made versions; so too, with the coming of cheap steel, does the
+combination of wood (walnut) and brass used in the cabinetmaker's bevel
+slowly disappear; and, finally, in the custom-fitted pistol-like grip of
+the saw, there is an identity, in feeling at least, between craftsman
+and tool never quite achieved in later mass-produced versions.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image49.jpg" width="450" height="596" alt="Figure 49." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 49.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Early 19th century: The designation
+&quot;gentleman&#39;s tool chest</span>&quot; required a chest of &quot;high-style&quot; but
+necessitated no change in the tools it held. (Book 87, Cutler and
+Company, Castle Hill Works, Sheffield. <i>Courtesy of the Victoria and
+Albert Museum.</i>)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image50.jpg" width="450" height="72" alt="Figure 50." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 50.&mdash;<span class="smcap">19th century: The screwdriver</span>, which began to
+appear regularly on the woodworker&#39;s bench after 1800, did not share the
+long evolution and tradition of other Anglo-American tool designs. The
+screwdriver in its early versions frequently had a scalloped blade for
+no other purpose than decoration. (Smithsonian photo 49794.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 400px;">
+<img src="images/image51.jpg" width="400" height="253" alt="Figure 51." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 51.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1870: The use </span> of a new material prompted a
+departure from the traditional in shape and encouraged surface
+elaboration. The tendency, however, was short lived and the
+mass-produced metallic plane rapidly achieved a purity of design as
+pleasing as its wooden predecessors. (Private collection. Smithsonian
+photo 49789.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>Occasionally, ruling taste is reflected in the design of the carpenter's
+equipment. Notable is the "gentleman's tool chest" (fig. 49) advertised
+in the pattern book of the Castle Hill Works. The bracket feet, brass
+pulls, and inlaid keyholes imitate the style of the domestic chest of
+drawers of the period 1790 to 1810&mdash;undoubtedly, features included by
+the manufacturer to appeal to a gentleman of refined taste. In contrast
+to this Sheffield product is the plate from Shaw's <i>The Modern
+Architect</i>. The concept of the builder-carpenter as a gentleman still
+prevails, although the idea in this American scene is conveyed in the
+mid-19th century through fashionable dress. The tools and in particular
+the tool chest reflect only the severest of functional lines (fig. 19,
+p. 196).</p>
+
+<p>In deference to ruling taste, some tools lost for a time the clean lines
+that had long distinguished them. The screwdriver, simple in shape
+(accession 61.46) but in little demand until the 1840's, occasionally
+became most elaborate in its factory-made form (fig. 50) and departed
+noticeably from the unadorned style of traditional English and American
+tools. The scalloped blade, influenced by the rival styles rather than a
+technical need, seemed little related to the purpose of the tool.<a name="FNanchor_10_10" id="FNanchor_10_10"></a><a href="#Footnote_10_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a>
+No less archaic in decoration was the iron-bodied version of the plow
+plane (fig. 51). The Anglo-American tradition seems completely put
+aside. In its place is a most functional object, but one elaborately
+covered with a shell and vine motif! Patented in 1870 by Charles Miller
+and manufactured by the Stanley Rule and Level Company, this tool in its
+unadorned version is of a type that was much admired by the British
+experts at Philadelphia's Centennial Exhibition in 1876. What prompted
+such superfluous decoration on the plow plane? Perhaps it was to appeal
+to the flood of newly arrived American craftsmen who might find in the
+rococo something reminiscent of the older tools they had known in
+Europe. Perhaps it was simply the transference to the tool itself of the
+decorative work then demanded of the wood craftsmen. Or was it mainly a
+compulsion to dress, with little effort, a lackluster material that
+seemed stark and cold to Victorians accustomed to the ornateness being
+achieved elsewhere with the jigsaw and wood? Whatever the cause, the
+result did not persist long as a guide to hand-tool design. Instead, the
+strong, plain lines that had evolved over two centuries won universal
+endorsement at the Centennial Exhibition. The prize tools reflected
+little of the ornateness apparent in the wares of most of the other
+exhibitors. American makers of edge tools exhibiting at the Centennial
+showed the world not only examples of quality but of attractiveness as
+well.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image52a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image52.jpg" width="450" height="201" alt="Figure 52." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 52.&mdash;<span class="smcap">19th century: The American axe was unexcelled</span>
+in design and ease of use. European observers praised it as distinctly
+American. At the Centennial Exhibition in 1876 Collins and Company of
+New York City was singled out as one of the outstanding manufacturers
+exhibiting these axes, a reputation that persisted. (<i>Tools for all
+Trades</i>, Hammacher, Schlemmer and Company, New York, 1896. Smithsonian
+photo 56625.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 500px;"><a href="images/image53a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image53.jpg" width="500" height="104" alt="Figure 53." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 53.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1876: Disston and Sons long continued</span> to
+remind prospective buyers of the company&#39;s success at the Philadelphia
+Centennial Exhibition by retaining the &quot;Centennial Saw, No. 76&quot; as a
+brand name. (<i>Illustrated Catalogue</i>, Baldwin, Robbins and Company,
+Boston, 1894. Smithsonian photo 56627.)</span>
+</div>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Change" id="Change"></a>Change</h3>
+
+<p>American hand tools in 1876 did not achieve the popular acclaim accorded
+the Corliss engine, yet few products shown by American exhibitors were
+more highly praised by foreign experts. It seems justified to suggest
+that American edge tools displayed at the Centennial had reached their
+high point of development&mdash;a metamorphosis that began with the medieval
+European tool forms, moved through a period of reliance on English
+precedents, and ended, in the last quarter of the 19th century, with the
+production of American hand tools "occupying an enviable position before
+the world."<a name="FNanchor_11_11" id="FNanchor_11_11"></a><a href="#Footnote_11_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a></p>
+
+<div class="figleft" style="width: 400px;">
+<img src="images/image54.jpg" width="400" height="538" alt="Figure 54." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 54.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1809: The introduction</span> of the gimlet-pointed
+auger followed Ezra L&#39;Hommedieu&#39;s patent of 1809. From this date until
+its general disuse in the early 20th century, the conformation of the
+tool remained unchanged, although the quality of steel and the precision
+of the twist steadily improved. (Wash drawing from the restored patent
+drawings awarded July 31, 1809, U.S. Patent Office, Record Group 241,
+the National Archives. Smithsonian photo 49790-A.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 400px;"><a href="images/image55a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image55.jpg" width="400" height="356" alt="Figure 55." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 55.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1855: Russell Jennings&#39;</span> improved auger bits,
+first patented in 1855, received superior citation at the Philadelphia
+Centennial; in the years following, the trade name &quot;Jennings&quot; was seldom
+omitted from trade catalogues. (Original wash drawing, patent drawing
+submitted by R. Jennings, U.S. Patent Office, Record Group 241, the
+National Archives.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>The tool most highly praised at Philadelphia was the American felling
+axe (fig. 52) "made out of a solid piece of cast steel" with the eye
+"punched out of the solid." When compared to other forms, the American
+axe was "more easily worked," and its shape permitted an easier
+withdrawal after striking.<a name="FNanchor_12_12" id="FNanchor_12_12"></a><a href="#Footnote_12_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a></p>
+
+<p>Sawmakers, too, were singled out for praise&mdash;in particular Disston &amp;
+Sons (fig. 53) for "improvements in the form of the handles, and in the
+mode of fixing them to the saw." The Disston saw also embodied an
+improved blade shape which made it "lighter and more convenient by
+giving it a greater taper to the point." Sheffield saws, once supplied
+to most of the world, were not exhibited at Philadelphia, and the
+British expert lamented that our "monopoly remains with us no
+longer."<a name="FNanchor_13_13" id="FNanchor_13_13"></a><a href="#Footnote_13_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 600px;"><a href="images/image56a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image56.jpg" width="600" height="396" alt="Figure 56." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 56.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1894: The Persistence of &quot;jennings&quot; As a
+Trade Name</span> is suggested by the vignette from the &quot;Illustrated Catalogue&quot;
+of Baldwin, Robbins and Company, published in 1894. (Smithsonian photo
+56628.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>Augers, essential to "the heavier branches of the building trade ...
+[and] in the workshops of joiners, carpenters, cabinetmakers, turners,
+carvers, and by amateurs and others," were considered a "most important
+exhibit" at the Centennial. The auger had attained a perfection in "the
+accuracy of the twist, the various forms of the cutters, the quality of
+the steel, and fine finish of the twist and polish." The ancient pod or
+shell auger had nearly disappeared from use, to be replaced by "the
+screwed form of the tool" considerably refined by comparison to
+L'Hommedieu's prototype, patented in 1809 (fig. 54). Russell Jennings'
+patented auger bits (figs. 55&ndash;56) were cited for their "workmanship and
+quality," and, collectively, the Exhibition "fully established the
+reputation of American augers."<a name="FNanchor_14_14" id="FNanchor_14_14"></a><a href="#Footnote_14_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a> Likewise, makers of braces and bits
+were commended for the number of excellent examples shown. Some were a
+departure from the familiar design with "an expansive chuck for the
+bit," but others were simply elegant examples of the traditional brace,
+in wood, japanned and heavily reinforced with highly polished brass
+sidings. An example exhibited by E. Mills and Company, of Philadelphia,
+received a certification from the judges as being "of the best quality
+and finish" (fig. 57). The Mills brace, together with other
+award-winning tools of the company&mdash;drawknives, screwdrivers, and
+spokeshaves&mdash;is preserved in the collections of the Smithsonian
+Institution (accession 319326). Today as a group they confirm "the
+remarkably fine quality of ... both iron and steel" that characterized
+the manufacture of American edge tools in the second half of the 19th
+century.<a name="FNanchor_15_15" id="FNanchor_15_15"></a><a href="#Footnote_15_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 500px;">
+<img src="images/image57.jpg" width="500" height="204" alt="Figure 57." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 57.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1876: Japanned and splinted with heavy brass</span>,
+this brace was among the award-winning tools exhibited at the Centennial
+by E. Mills and Company of Philadelphia. (Smithsonian photo 49792-D.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 500px;"><a href="images/image58a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image58.jpg" width="500" height="346" alt="Figure 58." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 58.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1827: The bench planes</span> exhibited at
+Philadelphia in 1876 were a radical departure from the traditional. In
+1827 H. Knowles patented an iron-bodied bench plane that portended a
+change in form that would witness a substitution of steel for wood in
+all critical areas of the tool&#39;s construction, and easy adjustment of
+the cutting edge by a setscrew, and an increased flexibility that
+allowed one plane to be used for several purposes. (Wash drawing from
+the restored patent drawings, August 24, 1827, U.S. Patent Office,
+Record Group 241, the National Archives.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 500px;"><a href="images/image59a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image59.jpg" width="500" height="364" alt="Figure 59." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 59.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1857: The addition of metallic parts</span> to
+critical areas of wear as suggested by M.B. Tidey did not at first
+radically alter the design of the bench plane. (Wash drawing from U.S.
+Patent Office, March 24, 1857, Record Group 241, the National
+Archives.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>It is the plane, however, that best exemplifies the progress of tool
+design. In 1876, American planemakers were enthusiastically credited
+with having achieved "an important change in the structure of the
+tool."<a name="FNanchor_16_16" id="FNanchor_16_16"></a><a href="#Footnote_16_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> Although change had been suggested by American patentees as
+early as the 1820's, mass production lagged until after the Civil War,
+and the use of this new tool form was not widespread outside of the
+United States. Hazard Knowles of Colchester, Connecticut, in 1827,
+patented a plane stock of cast iron which in many respects was a
+prototype of later Centennial models (fig. 58).<a name="FNanchor_17_17" id="FNanchor_17_17"></a><a href="#Footnote_17_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a> It is evident, even
+in its earliest manifestation, that the quest for improvement of the
+bench plane did not alter its sound design. In 1857, M.B. Tidey (fig.
+59) listed several of the goals that motivated planemakers:</p>
+
+<div class="blockquot"><p class="noin">First to simplify the manufacturing of planes; second to render
+them more durable; third to retain a uniform mouth; fourth to
+obviate their clogging; and fifth the retention of the essential
+part of the plane when the stock is worn out.<a name="FNanchor_18_18" id="FNanchor_18_18"></a><a href="#Footnote_18_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a> </p></div>
+
+<p>By far the greatest number of patents was concerned with perfecting an
+adjustable plane iron and methods of constructing the sole of a plane so
+that it would always be "true." Obviously the use of metal rather than
+the older medium, wood, was a natural step, but in the process of
+changing from the wood to the iron-bodied bench plane there were many
+transitional suggestions that combined both materials. Seth Howes of
+South Chatham, Massachusetts, in U.S. patent 37,694, specified:</p>
+
+<div class="blockquot"><p class="noin">This invention relates to an improvement in that class of planes
+which are commonly termed "bench-planes," comprising the foreplane,
+smoothing plane, jack plane, jointer, &amp;c.</p>
+
+<p class="noin">The invention consists in a novel and improved mode of adjusting
+the plane-iron to regulate the depth of the cut of the same, in
+connection with an adjustable cap, all being constructed and
+arranged in such a manner that the plane-iron may be "set" with the
+greatest facility and firmly retained in position by the adjustment
+simply of the cap to the plane-iron, after the latter is set, and
+the cap also rendered capable of being adjusted to compensate for
+the wear of the "sole" or face of the plane stock. </p></div>
+
+<p>The stock of Howes' plane was wood combined with metal plates, caps, and
+screws. Thomas Worrall of Lowell was issued patent 17,657 for a plane
+based on the same general principle (fig. 60). Worrall claimed in his
+specifications of June 23, 1857:</p>
+
+<div class="blockquot"><p class="noin">the improved manufacture of [the] carpenter's bench plane or
+jointer as made with its handle, its wooden stock to which said
+handle is affixed, and a separate metallic cutter holder, and
+cutter clamping devices arranged together substantially as
+specified. </p></div>
+
+<p>Finally patentees throughout the 19th century, faced with an increasing
+proliferation of tool types, frequently sought to perfect multipurpose
+implements of a type best represented later by the ubiquitous Stanley
+plane. The evolution of the all-purpose idea, which is incidentally not
+peculiar to hand tools alone, can be seen from random statements
+selected from U.S. patents for the improvement of bench planes. In 1864
+Stephen Williams in the specifications of his patent 43,360 stated:</p>
+
+<div class="blockquot"><p class="noin">I denominate my improvement the "universal smoothing plane,"
+because it belongs to that variety of planes in which the face is
+made changeable, so that it may be conveniently adapted to the
+planing of curved as well as straight surfaces. By the use of my
+improvement surfaces that are convex, concave, or straight may be
+easily worked, the face of the tool being readily changed from one
+form to another to suit the surface to which it is to be applied. </p></div>
+
+<p>The announced object of Theodore Duval's improved grooving plane (pat.
+97,177) was "to produce in one tool all that is required to form grooves
+of several different widths." None was more appealing than Daniel D.
+Whitker's saw-rabbet plane (pat. 52,478) which combined "an adjustable
+saw with an adjustable fence or gage, both being attached to a stock
+with handle similar to a plane, forming together a tool combining the
+properties of the joiner's plow and fillister" (fig. 61). Nor was
+Whitker's idea simply a drawing-board exercise. It was produced
+commercially and was well advertised, as seen in the circular reproduced
+in figure 62.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 400px;"><a href="images/image60a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image60.jpg" width="400" height="701" alt="Figure 60." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 60.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1857: In a variety of arrangements</span>, the
+addition of metal plates, caps, and screws at the mouth of the plane, as
+shown in Thomas Worrall&#39;s drawing, proved a transitional device that
+preserved the ancient shape of the tool and slowed the introduction of
+bench planes made entirely of iron. (Wash drawing from U.S. Patent
+Office, June 23, 1857, Record Group 241, the National Archives.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 500px;"><a href="images/image61a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image61.jpg" width="500" height="328" alt="Figure 61." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 61.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1865: Not all multipurpose innovations</span>
+resulted from the use of new materials. Daniel D. Whitker patented a
+combination saw and rabbet plane little different from one illustrated
+by Andr&eacute;-Jacob Roubo in his <i>L&#39;Art du menuisier</i> in 1769. (Wash drawing
+from U.S. Patent Office, October 4, 1865, Record Group 241, the National
+Archives.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>In sum, these ideas produced a major break with the traditional shape of
+the bench plane. William Foster in 1843 (pat. 3,355), Birdsill Holly in
+1852 (pat. 9,094), and W.S. Loughborough in 1859 (pat. 23,928) are
+particularly good examples of the radical departure from the wooden
+block. And, in the period after the Civil War, C.G. Miller (discussed on
+p. 213 and in fig. 63), B.A. Blandin (fig. 64), and Russell Phillips
+(pat. 106,868) patented multipurpose metallic bench planes of excellent
+design. It should be pointed out that the patentees mentioned above
+represent only a few of the great number that tried to improve the
+plane. Only the trend of change is suggested by the descriptions and
+illustrations presented here. The cumulative effect awaited a showcase,
+and the planemakers found it at the Centennial Exhibition of 1876 held
+in Philadelphia.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image62a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image62.jpg" width="450" height="648" alt="Figure 62." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 62.&mdash;<span class="smcap">About 1865: The progress of an idea</span> from an
+18th-century encyclopedia through an American patentee to commercial
+reality can be seen in this flier advertising Whitker&#39;s saw-rabbet.
+(Smithsonian Institution Library. Smithsonian photo 56629.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>The impact of these new planes at the Exhibition caused some
+retrospection among the judges:</p>
+
+<div class="blockquot"><p class="noin">The planes manufactured in Great Britain and in other countries
+fifty years ago were formed of best beech-wood; the plane irons
+were of steel and iron welded together; the jointer plane, about 21
+inches long, was a bulky tool; the jack and hand planes were of the
+same materials. Very little change has been made upon the plane in
+Great Britain, unless in the superior workmanship and higher
+quality of the plane iron.<a name="FNanchor_19_19" id="FNanchor_19_19"></a><a href="#Footnote_19_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a> </p></div>
+
+<p>The solid wood-block plane, varying from country to country only in the
+structure of its handles and body decoration, had preserved its
+integrity of design since the Middle Ages. At the Centennial, however,
+only a few examples of the old-type plane were exhibited. A new shape
+dominated the cases. Designated by foreign observers as the American
+plane, it received extended comment. Here was a tool</p>
+
+<div class="blockquot"><p class="noin">constructed with a skeleton iron body, having a curved wooden
+handle; the plane iron is of the finest cast-steel; the cover is
+fitted with an ingenious trigger at the top, which, with a screw
+below the iron, admits of the plane iron being removed for
+sharpening and setting without the aid of the hammer, and with the
+greatest ease. The extensive varieties of plane iron in use are
+fitted for every requirement; a very ingenious arrangement is
+applied to the tools for planing the insides of circles or other
+curved works, such as stair-rails, etc. The sole of the plane is
+formed of a plate of tempered steel about the thickness of a
+handsaw, according to the length required, and this plate is
+adapted to the curve, and is securely fixed at each end. With this
+tool the work is not only done better but in less time than
+formerly. In some exhibits the face of the plane was made of beech
+or of other hard wood, secured by screws to the stock, and the tool
+becomes a hybrid, all other parts remaining the same as in the iron
+plane.<a name="FNanchor_20_20" id="FNanchor_20_20"></a><a href="#Footnote_20_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a> </p></div>
+
+<p>The popularity of Bailey's patented planes (fig. 65), the type so
+praised above, was by no means transitory. In 1884 the Boston firm of
+Goodnow &amp; Wightman, "Importers, Manufacturers and Dealers in Tools of
+all kinds," illustrated the several planes just described and assured
+prospective buyers that</p>
+
+<div class="blockquot"><p class="noin">These tools meet with universal approbation from the best
+Mechanics. For beauty of style and finish they are unequalled, and
+the great convenience in operating renders them the cheapest Planes
+in use; they are SELF-ADJUSTING in every respect; and each part
+being made INTERCHANGEABLE, can be replaced at a trifling
+expense.<a name="FNanchor_21_21" id="FNanchor_21_21"></a><a href="#Footnote_21_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> </p></div>
+
+<p>By 1900 an advertisement for Bailey's planes published in the catalogue
+of another Boston firm, Chandler and Farquhar, indicated that "over
+900,000" had already been sold.<a name="FNanchor_22_22" id="FNanchor_22_22"></a><a href="#Footnote_22_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a></p>
+
+<p>Other mass-produced edge tools&mdash;axes, adzes, braces and bits, augers,
+saws, and chisels&mdash;illustrated in the trade literature of the toolmakers
+became, as had the iron-bodied bench plane, standard forms. In the last
+quarter of the 19th century the tool catalogue replaced Moxon, Duhamel,
+Diderot, and the builders' manuals as the primary source for the study
+and identification of hand tools. The Centennial had called attention to
+the superiority of certain American tools and toolmakers. The result was
+that until the end of the century, trade literature faithfully drummed
+the products that had proven such "an attraction to the numerous
+artisans who visited the Centennial Exhibition from the United States
+and other countries."<a name="FNanchor_23_23" id="FNanchor_23_23"></a><a href="#Footnote_23_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image63a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image63.jpg" width="450" height="648" alt="Figure 63." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 63.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1870: The metallic version of the plow plane</span>
+later produced by Stanley and Company was patented by [Charles] G.
+Miller as a tool readily &quot;convertible into a grooving, rabbeting, or
+smoothing plane.&quot; In production this multipurpose plow gained an
+elaborate decoration (fig. 51) nowhere suggested in Miller&#39;s
+specification. (Wash drawing from U.S. Patent Office, June 28, 1870,
+Record Group 241, the National Archives.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<img src="images/image64.jpg" width="450" height="281" alt="Figure 64." title="" />
+<span class="caption">Figure 64.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1867: The drawing</span> accompanying B.A. Blandin&#39;s
+specification for an &quot;Improvement in Bench Planes&quot; retained only the
+familiarly shaped handle or tote of the traditional wood-bodied plane.
+This new shape rapidly became the standard form of the tool with later
+variations chiefly related to the adjustability of the plane-iron and
+sole. (Wash drawing from U.S. Patent Office, May 7, 1867, Record Group
+241, the National Archives.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>Collins and Company of New York City had been given commendation for the
+excellence of their axes; through the end of the century, Collins' brand
+felling axes, broad axes, and adzes were standard items, as witness
+Hammacher, Schlemmer and Company's catalogue of 1896.<a name="FNanchor_24_24" id="FNanchor_24_24"></a><a href="#Footnote_24_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> Disston saws
+were a byword, and the impact of their exhibit at Philadelphia was still
+strong, as judged from Baldwin, Robbins' catalogue of 1894. Highly
+recommended was the Disston no. 76, the "Centennial" handsaw with its
+"skew back" and "apple handle." Jennings' patented auger bits were
+likewise standard fare in nearly every tool catalogue.<a name="FNanchor_25_25" id="FNanchor_25_25"></a><a href="#Footnote_25_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a> So were bench
+planes manufactured by companies that had been cited at Philadelphia for
+the excellence of their product; namely, The Metallic Plane Company,
+Auburn, New York; The Middletown Tool Company, Middletown, Connecticut;
+Bailey, Leonard, and Company, Hartford; and The Sandusky Tool Company,
+Sandusky, Ohio.<a name="FNanchor_26_26" id="FNanchor_26_26"></a><a href="#Footnote_26_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a></p>
+
+<p>An excellent indication of the persistence of the Centennial influence,
+and of the tool catalogue as source material, is seen in Chandler and
+Farquhar's illustrated pamphlet of 1900. Their advertisement for
+Barber's improved ratchet brace (fig. 66), a tool much admired by the
+Centennial judges, amply illustrates the evolution of design of a basic
+implement present in American society since the first years of
+settlement. The Barber brace represents the ultimate sophistication of a
+tool, achieved through an expanded industrial technology rather than by
+an extended or newly found use for the device itself. It is a prime
+example of the transition of a tool from Moxon to its perfected form in
+the 20th century:</p>
+
+<div class="blockquot"><p class="noin">These Braces possess the following points of superiority: The Sweep
+is made from Steel; the Jaws are forged from Steel; the Wood Handle
+has brass rings inserted in each end so it cannot split off; the
+Chuck has a hardened Steel antifriction washer between the two
+sockets, thus reducing the wear. The Head has a bearing of steel
+balls, running on hard steel plates, so no wear can take place, as
+the friction is reduced to the minimum. The Brace is heavily
+nickel-plated and warranted in every particular. We endeavor to
+make these goods as nearly perfection as is possible in durability,
+quality of material and workmanship, and fineness and beauty of
+finish.<a name="FNanchor_27_27" id="FNanchor_27_27"></a><a href="#Footnote_27_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a> </p></div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image65a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image65.jpg" width="450" height="740" alt="Figure 65." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 65.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1900: American planemakers</span> had been cited at
+the Philadelphia Centennial as having introduced a dramatic change in
+the nature of the tool. Although wood-bodied planes continued to be
+used, they were outdated and in fact anachronistic by the close of the
+19th century. From the 1870&#39;s forward, it was the iron-bodied plane,
+most frequently Bailey&#39;s, that enlivened the trade literature.
+(Catalogue of Chandler and Farquhar, Boston, 1900. Smithsonian photo
+55798.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"><a href="images/image66a.jpg">
+<img src="images/image66.jpg" width="450" height="367" alt="Figure 66." title="" /></a>
+<span class="caption">Figure 66.&mdash;<span class="smcap">1900: Few tools suggest more clearly</span> the
+influence of modern industrial society upon the design and construction
+of traditional implements than Barber&#39;s ratchet brace. It is not without
+interest that as the tools of the wood craftsman became crisply
+efficient, his work declined correspondingly in individuality and
+character. The brace and the plane, as followed from Moxon through the
+trade literature of the late 19th century, achieved perfection in form
+and operation at a time when their basic functions had been usurped by
+machines. (Catalogue of Chandler and Farquhar, Boston, 1900. Smithsonian
+photo 56626.)</span>
+</div>
+
+<p>The description of Barber's brace documents a major technical change:
+wood to steel, leather washers to ball bearings, and natural patina to
+nickel plate. It is also an explanation for the appearance and shape of
+craftmen's tools, either hand forged or mass produced. In each case, the
+sought-after result in the form of a finished product has been an
+implement of "fineness and beauty." This quest motivated three centuries
+of toolmakers and brought vitality to hand-tool design. Moxon had
+advised:</p>
+
+<div class="blockquot">
+<p class="noin">
+He that will a good Edge win,<br />
+Must Forge thick and Grind thin.<a name="FNanchor_28_28" id="FNanchor_28_28"></a><a href="#Footnote_28_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a><br />
+</p></div>
+
+<p>If heeded, the result would be an edge tool that assured its owner "ease
+and delight."<a name="FNanchor_29_29" id="FNanchor_29_29"></a><a href="#Footnote_29_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> Throughout the period considered here, the most
+praiseworthy remarks made about edge tools were variations of either
+"unsurpassed in quality, finish, and beauty of style" or, more simply,
+commendation for "excellent design and superior workmanship."<a name="FNanchor_30_30" id="FNanchor_30_30"></a><a href="#Footnote_30_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a> The
+hand tool thus provoked the same value words in the 19th as in the 17th
+century.</p>
+
+<p>The aesthetics of industrial art, whether propounded by Moxon or by an
+official at the Philadelphia Centennial, proved the standard measure by
+which quality could be judged. Today these values are particularly valid
+when applied to a class of artifacts that changed slowly and have as
+their prime characteristics anonymity of maker and date. With such
+objects the origin, transition, and variation of shape are of primary
+interest. Consider the common auger whose "Office" Moxon declared "is to
+make great round holes" and whose importance was so clearly stressed at
+Philadelphia in 1876.<a name="FNanchor_31_31" id="FNanchor_31_31"></a><a href="#Footnote_31_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a> Neither its purpose nor its gross appearance
+(a T-handled boring tool) had changed. The tool did, however, develop
+qualitatively through 200 years, from a pod or shell to a spiral bit,
+from a blunt to a gimlet point, and from a hand-fashioned to a
+geometrically exact, factory-made implement: innovations associated with
+Cooke (1770), L'Hommedieu (1809), and Jennings (1850's). In each
+instance the tool was improved&mdash;a double spiral facilitated the
+discharge of shavings, a gimlet point allowed the direct insertion of
+the auger, and machine precision brought mathematical accuracy to the
+degree of twist. Still, overall appearance did not change. At the
+Centennial, Moxon would have recognized an auger, and, further, his
+lecture on its uses would have been singularly current. The large-bore
+spiral auger still denoted a mortise, tenon, and trenail mode of
+building in a wood-based technology; at the same time its near cousin,
+the wheelwright's reamer, suggested the reliance upon a transport
+dependent upon wooden hubs. The auger in its perfected form&mdash;fine steel,
+perfectly machined, and highly finished&mdash;contrasted with an auger of
+earlier vintage will clearly show the advance from forge to factory, but
+will indicate little new in its method of use or its intended purpose.</p>
+
+<p>Persons neither skilled in the use of tools nor interested in technical
+history will find that there is another response to the common auger, as
+there was to the upholsterer's hammer, the 18th-century brace, or the
+saw with the custom-fitted grip. This is a subjective reaction to a
+pleasing form. It is the same reaction that prompted artists to use
+tools as vehicles to help convey lessons in perspective, a frequent
+practice in 19th-century art manuals. The harmony of related parts&mdash;the
+balance of shaft and handle or the geometry of the twist&mdash;makes the
+auger a decorative object. This is not to say that the ancient
+woodworker's tool is not a document attesting a society's technical
+proficiency&mdash;ingenuity, craftsmanship, and productivity. It is only to
+suggest again that it is something more; a survival of the past whose
+intrinsic qualities permit it to stand alone as a bridge between the
+craftsman's hand and his work; an object of considerable appeal in which
+integrity of line and form is not dimmed by the skill of the user nor by
+the quality of the object produced by it.</p>
+
+<p>In America, this integrity of design is derived from three centuries of
+experience: one of heterogeneous character, the mid-17th to the
+mid-18th; one of predominately English influence, from 1750 to 1850; and
+one that saw the perfection of basic tools, by native innovators,
+between 1850 and the early 20th century. In the two earlier periods, the
+woodworking tool and the products it finished had a natural affinity
+owing largely to the harmony of line that both the tool and finished
+product shared. The later period, however, presents a striking contrast.
+Hand-tool design, with few exceptions, continued vigorous and functional
+amidst the confusion of an eclectic architecture, a flurry of rival
+styles, the horrors of the jigsaw, and the excesses of Victorian taste.
+In conclusion, it would seem that whether seeking some continuous thread
+in the evolution of a national style, or whether appraising American
+contributions to technology, such a search must rest, at least in part,
+upon the character and quality of the hand tools the society has made
+and used, because they offer a continuity largely unknown to other
+classes of material survivals.</p>
+
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <span class="smcap">W.M. Flinders Petrie</span>, "History in Tools," <i>Annual Report
+Smithsonian Institution</i>, 1918, pp. 563&ndash;572 [reprint].</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <span class="smcap">Johann Amos Comenius</span>, <i>Orbis Sensualium Pictus</i>, transl.
+Charles Hoole (London, 1685), pp. 130, 143.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <span class="smcap">Joseph Moxon</span>, <i>Mechanick Exercises or the Doctrine of
+Handy-Works</i>, 3rd. ed. (London, 1703), pp. 63, 119.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_4"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> <span class="smcap">Martin</span>, <i>Circle of the Mechanical Arts</i> (1813), p. 123.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_5_5" id="Footnote_5_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_5"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> <span class="smcap">Peter Nicholson</span>, <i>The Mechanic's Companion</i> (Philadelphia,
+1832), pp. 31, 89&ndash;90.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_6_6" id="Footnote_6_6"></a><a href="#FNanchor_6_6"><span class="label">[6]</span></a> <i>Catalog</i>, Book 87, Cutler and Co., Castle Hill Works,
+Sheffield [in the collections of the Victoria and Albert Museum,
+London]; and <i>Illustrated Supplement to the Catalogue of Bench Planes</i>,
+Arrowmammett Works (Middletown, Conn., 1857) [in the Smithsonian
+Institution Library].</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_7_7" id="Footnote_7_7"></a><a href="#FNanchor_7_7"><span class="label">[7]</span></a> York County Records, Virginia Deeds, Orders, and Wills, no.
+13 (1706&ndash;1710), p. 248; and the inventory of Amasa Thompson in <span class="smcap">Lawrence
+B. Romaine</span>, "A Yankee Carpenter and His Tools," <i>The Chronicle</i> of the
+Early American Industries Association (July 1953), vol. 6, no. 3, pp.
+33&ndash;34.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_8_8" id="Footnote_8_8"></a><a href="#FNanchor_8_8"><span class="label">[8]</span></a> <i>Reports by the Juries: Exhibition of the Works of Industry
+of All Nations, 1851</i> (London, 1852), p. 485.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_9_9" id="Footnote_9_9"></a><a href="#FNanchor_9_9"><span class="label">[9]</span></a> U.S. patent specifications cited in this paragraph may be
+found at the U.S. Patent Office, Washington, D.C.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_10_10" id="Footnote_10_10"></a><a href="#FNanchor_10_10"><span class="label">[10]</span></a> In 1865 George Parr in his application for an improved
+screwdriver stated categorically that the scalloped blade served no
+purpose other than decoration. See U.S. patent 45,854, dated January 10,
+1865.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_11_11" id="Footnote_11_11"></a><a href="#FNanchor_11_11"><span class="label">[11]</span></a> Francis A. Walker, ed., <i>United States Centennial
+Commission, International Exhibition, 1876, Reports and Awards, Group
+XV</i> (Philadelphia, 1877), p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_12_12" id="Footnote_12_12"></a><a href="#FNanchor_12_12"><span class="label">[12]</span></a> Ibid., p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_13_13" id="Footnote_13_13"></a><a href="#FNanchor_13_13"><span class="label">[13]</span></a> Ibid., pp. 9&ndash;10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_14_14" id="Footnote_14_14"></a><a href="#FNanchor_14_14"><span class="label">[14]</span></a> Ibid., pp. 11&ndash;12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_15_15" id="Footnote_15_15"></a><a href="#FNanchor_15_15"><span class="label">[15]</span></a> Ibid., pp. 14, 44, 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_16_16" id="Footnote_16_16"></a><a href="#FNanchor_16_16"><span class="label">[16]</span></a> Ibid., p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_17_17" id="Footnote_17_17"></a><a href="#FNanchor_17_17"><span class="label">[17]</span></a> Restored patent 4,859X, August 24, 1827, National
+Archives, Washington, D.C.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_18_18" id="Footnote_18_18"></a><a href="#FNanchor_18_18"><span class="label">[18]</span></a> U.S. pat. 16,889, U.S. Patent Office, Washington, D.C. The
+numbered specifications that follow may be found in the same place.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_19_19" id="Footnote_19_19"></a><a href="#FNanchor_19_19"><span class="label">[19]</span></a> Walker, ed., <i>Reports and Awards</i>, group 15, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_20_20" id="Footnote_20_20"></a><a href="#FNanchor_20_20"><span class="label">[20]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_21_21" id="Footnote_21_21"></a><a href="#FNanchor_21_21"><span class="label">[21]</span></a> <i>Tools</i> (Boston, 1884), p. 54 [in the Smithsonian
+Institution Library].</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_22_22" id="Footnote_22_22"></a><a href="#FNanchor_22_22"><span class="label">[22]</span></a> <i>Tools and Supplies</i> (June 1900), no. 85 [in the
+Smithsonian Institution Library].</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_23_23" id="Footnote_23_23"></a><a href="#FNanchor_23_23"><span class="label">[23]</span></a> Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_24_24" id="Footnote_24_24"></a><a href="#FNanchor_24_24"><span class="label">[24]</span></a> <i>Tools for All Trades</i> (New York, 1896), item 75 [in the
+Smithsonian Institution Library].</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_25_25" id="Footnote_25_25"></a><a href="#FNanchor_25_25"><span class="label">[25]</span></a> See <i>Baldwin, Robbins &amp; Co.: Illustrated Catalogue</i>
+(Boston, 1894), pp. 954, 993 [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_26_26" id="Footnote_26_26"></a><a href="#FNanchor_26_26"><span class="label">[26]</span></a> Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_27_27" id="Footnote_27_27"></a><a href="#FNanchor_27_27"><span class="label">[27]</span></a> <i>Tools and Supplies</i>, op. cit. (footnote 22).</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_28_28" id="Footnote_28_28"></a><a href="#FNanchor_28_28"><span class="label">[28]</span></a> <i>Mechanick Exercise</i> ..., p. 62.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_29_29" id="Footnote_29_29"></a><a href="#FNanchor_29_29"><span class="label">[29]</span></a> Ibid., p. 95.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_30_30" id="Footnote_30_30"></a><a href="#FNanchor_30_30"><span class="label">[30]</span></a> Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), pp. 31&ndash;49.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_31_31" id="Footnote_31_31"></a><a href="#FNanchor_31_31"><span class="label">[31]</span></a> <i>Mechanick Exercises</i> ..., p. 94.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr />
+<h3><a name="BIBLIOGRAPHY" id="BIBLIOGRAPHY"></a>BIBLIOGRAPHY</h3>
+
+
+<p class="noin">
+<i>Book of trades, or library of the useful arts.</i> 1st Amer. ed. Whitehall, N.Y., 1807.<br />
+<br />
+<i>Boy's book of trades.</i> London, 1866.<br />
+<br />
+<i>The cabinetmaker in eighteenth-century Williamsburg.</i> (Williamsburg Craft Series.)<br />
+Williamsburg, Va., 1963.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Comenius, Johann Amos</span>. <i>Orbis sensualium pictus.</i> Transl. Charles Hoole. London,<br />
+1664, 1685, 1777, et al.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Cotter, John L.</span> <i>Archeological excavations at Jamestown, Virginia.</i> (No. 4 in Archeological<br />
+Research Series.) Washington: National Park Service, 1958.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Diderot, Denis</span>. <i>L'encyclop&eacute;die, ou dictionnaire raisonn&eacute; des sciences, des arts et des m&eacute;tiers.</i><br />
+Paris, 1751&ndash;1765.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Early American Industries Association</span>. <i>Chronicle.</i> Williamsburg, Va., 1933+.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Gillispie, Charles Coulston</span>, ed. <i>A Diderot pictorial encyclopedia of trades and industry.</i><br />
+New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1959.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Goodman, W.L.</span> <i>The history of woodworking tools.</i> London: G. Bell and Sons, Ltd.,<br />
+1964.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Holtzapffel, Charles</span>. <i>Turning and mechanical manipulations.</i> London [1846].<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Knight, Edward Henry</span>. <i>Knight's American mechanical dictionary.</i> New York, 1874&ndash;1876.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Martin, Thomas</span>. <i>The circle of the mechanical arts.</i> London, 1813.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Mercer, Henry C.</span> <i>Ancient carpenters' tools.</i> Doylestown, Pennsylvania: The Bucks<br />
+County Historical Society, 1951.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Moxon, Joseph</span>. <i>Mechanick exercises.</i> 3rd ed. London, 1703.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Nicholson, Peter</span>. <i>The mechanic's companion.</i> Philadelphia, 1832.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Petersen, Eugene T.</span> <i>Gentlemen on the frontier: A pictorial record of the culture of Michilimackinac.</i><br />
+Mackinac Island, Mich., 1964.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Petrie, Sir William Matthew Flinders</span>. <i>Tools and weapons illustrated by the Egyptian<br />
+collection in University College, London.</i> London, 1917.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Roubo, Andr&eacute;-Jacob</span>. <i>L'art du menuisier.</i> (In Henri-Louis Duhamel du Monceau,<br />
+<i>Descriptions des arts et m&eacute;tiers</i>.) Paris, 1761&ndash;1788.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Sachs, Hans</span>. <i>Das St&auml;ndebuch: 114 Holzschnitte von Jost Amman, mit Reimen von Hans<br />
+Sachs.</i> Leipzig: Insel-Verlag, 1934.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Singer, Charles</span>, et al. <i>A history of technology.</i> 5 vols. New York and London:<br />
+Oxford University Press, 1954&ndash;1958.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Sloane, Eric</span>. <i>A museum of early American tools.</i> New York: Wilfred Funk, Inc.,<br />
+1964.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Tomlinson, Charles</span>. <i>Illustrations of trades.</i> 2nd ed. London, 1867.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Welsh, Peter C.</span> "The Decorative Appeal of Hand Tools," <i>Antiques</i>, vol. 87, no. 2,<br />
+February 1965, pp. 204&ndash;207.<br />
+<br />
+---- U.S. patents, 1790&ndash;1870: New uses for old ideas. Paper 48 in <i>Contributions<br />
+from the Museum of History and Technology:</i> Papers 45&ndash;53 (U.S. National<br />
+Museum Bulletin 241), by various authors; Washington: Smithsonian Institution,<br />
+1965.<br />
+<br />
+<span class="smcap">Wildung, Frank H.</span> <i>Woodworking tools at Shelburne Museum.</i> (No. 3 in Museum<br />
+Pamphlet Series.) Shelburne, Vermont: The Shelburne Museum, 1957.<br />
+</p>
+<hr />
+<p class="center"><small>
+U.S. Government Printing Office: 1966<br />
+<br />
+For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office<br />
+Washington, D.C., 20402&mdash;Price 70 cents<br />
+</small></p>
+<hr />
+<p class="noin">
+<i>Paper 51, pages 178&ndash;228, from</i> UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN<br />
+<br /></p>
+
+<div class="figleft" style="width: 300px;">
+<img src="images/image67.jpg" width="300" height="292" alt="" title="" />
+</div>
+
+<p class="noin"><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
+<big>CONTRIBUTIONS FROM<br />
+THE MUSEUM OF HISTORY<br />
+AND TECHNOLOGY</big><br />
+<br />
+SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION &middot; WASHINGTON, D.C.<br />
+</p>
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+<pre>
+
+
+
+
+
+End of Project Gutenberg's Woodworking Tools 1600-1900, by Peter C. Welsh
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WOODWORKING TOOLS 1600-1900 ***
+
+***** This file should be named 27238-h.htm or 27238-h.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        https://www.gutenberg.org/2/7/2/3/27238/
+
+Produced by Chris Curnow, Joseph Cooper, Greg Bergquist
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+https://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+https://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at https://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit https://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     https://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
+
+</pre>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/27238-h/images/icover.jpg b/27238-h/images/icover.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2fb5daf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/icover.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/icover_th.jpg b/27238-h/images/icover_th.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..46ff476
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/icover_th.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image1.jpg b/27238-h/images/image1.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3ae8573
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image1.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image10.jpg b/27238-h/images/image10.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f528aef
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image10.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image10a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image10a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3a4e91f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image10a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image11.jpg b/27238-h/images/image11.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0fc3f7a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image11.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image11a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image11a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0643226
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image11a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image12.jpg b/27238-h/images/image12.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0b60a8e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image12.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image13.jpg b/27238-h/images/image13.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..753f066
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image13.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image14.jpg b/27238-h/images/image14.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ee4018a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image14.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image15.jpg b/27238-h/images/image15.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..329d33e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image15.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image16.jpg b/27238-h/images/image16.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1cfa4b7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image16.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image17.jpg b/27238-h/images/image17.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e557296
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image17.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image18.jpg b/27238-h/images/image18.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e872bcd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image18.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image19.jpg b/27238-h/images/image19.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ad5d6ab
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image19.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image2.jpg b/27238-h/images/image2.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..72c1d27
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image2.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image20.jpg b/27238-h/images/image20.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..32142e7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image20.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image21.jpg b/27238-h/images/image21.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e1cf18e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image21.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image22.jpg b/27238-h/images/image22.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ae874d4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image22.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image23.jpg b/27238-h/images/image23.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..93688bc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image23.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image24.jpg b/27238-h/images/image24.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5ff4e37
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image24.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image25.jpg b/27238-h/images/image25.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..56216ed
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image25.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image26.jpg b/27238-h/images/image26.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..370bb47
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image26.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image27.jpg b/27238-h/images/image27.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..76c408a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image27.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image28.jpg b/27238-h/images/image28.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2c317f0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image28.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image29.jpg b/27238-h/images/image29.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c782521
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image29.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image3.jpg b/27238-h/images/image3.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e8b2621
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image3.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image30.jpg b/27238-h/images/image30.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..02a6c3c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image30.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image31.jpg b/27238-h/images/image31.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a1720ba
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image31.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image32.jpg b/27238-h/images/image32.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..819c150
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image32.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image32a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image32a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9ca9d59
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image32a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image33.jpg b/27238-h/images/image33.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ad79877
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image33.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image34.jpg b/27238-h/images/image34.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..737a8e8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image34.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image34a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image34a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..06d26eb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image34a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image35.jpg b/27238-h/images/image35.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2af6b8a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image35.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image36.jpg b/27238-h/images/image36.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..761faea
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image36.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image37.jpg b/27238-h/images/image37.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..59378da
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image37.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image38.jpg b/27238-h/images/image38.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4be3cb3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image38.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image39.jpg b/27238-h/images/image39.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d964ec8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image39.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image3a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image3a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6ef8206
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image3a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image4.jpg b/27238-h/images/image4.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..12084b7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image4.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image40.jpg b/27238-h/images/image40.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..151cb1d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image40.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image41.jpg b/27238-h/images/image41.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..58782f7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image41.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image42.jpg b/27238-h/images/image42.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..98e1c55
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image42.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image43.jpg b/27238-h/images/image43.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c26276c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image43.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image44.jpg b/27238-h/images/image44.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0a8be23
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image44.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image45.jpg b/27238-h/images/image45.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..887375e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image45.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image46.jpg b/27238-h/images/image46.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..17bd880
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image46.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image47.jpg b/27238-h/images/image47.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e8414fb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image47.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image48.jpg b/27238-h/images/image48.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6424d4b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image48.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image49.jpg b/27238-h/images/image49.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9c275f1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image49.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image4a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image4a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..05981e6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image4a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image5.jpg b/27238-h/images/image5.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..47f1cb6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image5.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image50.jpg b/27238-h/images/image50.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3b2d917
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image50.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image51.jpg b/27238-h/images/image51.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c96c205
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image51.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image52.jpg b/27238-h/images/image52.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d0103ce
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image52.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image52a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image52a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..be183f1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image52a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image53.jpg b/27238-h/images/image53.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a87cdac
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image53.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image53a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image53a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1d1313a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image53a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image54.jpg b/27238-h/images/image54.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5c2297b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image54.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image55.jpg b/27238-h/images/image55.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8fe0f59
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image55.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image55a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image55a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f16b5b2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image55a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image56.jpg b/27238-h/images/image56.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f95808f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image56.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image56a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image56a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e3a1875
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image56a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image57.jpg b/27238-h/images/image57.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e18ab0a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image57.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image58.jpg b/27238-h/images/image58.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2e040d2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image58.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image58a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image58a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..98e730a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image58a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image59.jpg b/27238-h/images/image59.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cb5ab61
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image59.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image59a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image59a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e7b4444
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image59a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image5a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image5a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9ab9e5d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image5a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image6.jpg b/27238-h/images/image6.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7162742
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image6.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image60.jpg b/27238-h/images/image60.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3d9853b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image60.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image60a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image60a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..00d4394
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image60a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image61.jpg b/27238-h/images/image61.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..00b4d68
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image61.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image61a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image61a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0abeeb2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image61a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image62.jpg b/27238-h/images/image62.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b76f308
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image62.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image62a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image62a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0c28ed7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image62a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image63.jpg b/27238-h/images/image63.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5dd9d64
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image63.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image63a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image63a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0329856
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image63a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image64.jpg b/27238-h/images/image64.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..227adfa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image64.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image65.jpg b/27238-h/images/image65.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3fcae39
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image65.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image65a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image65a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..15502c5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image65a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image66.jpg b/27238-h/images/image66.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..eb69942
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image66.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image66a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image66a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..64a9688
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image66a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image67.jpg b/27238-h/images/image67.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..024818b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image67.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image6a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image6a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d836f6a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image6a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image7.jpg b/27238-h/images/image7.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..459d2a8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image7.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image7a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image7a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fb6949c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image7a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image8.jpg b/27238-h/images/image8.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..05101a1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image8.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image8a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image8a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0eb4a90
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image8a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image9.jpg b/27238-h/images/image9.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a588c0e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image9.jpg
diff --git a/27238-h/images/image9a.jpg b/27238-h/images/image9a.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b066944
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-h/images/image9a.jpg
diff --git a/27238-page-images/c001.jpg b/27238-page-images/c001.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6bfa771
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/c001.jpg
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p001.png b/27238-page-images/p001.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b9d0e01
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p001.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p002.png b/27238-page-images/p002.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..072f00b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p002.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p003.png b/27238-page-images/p003.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5c92d37
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p003.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p004.png b/27238-page-images/p004.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b2a6b3f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p004.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p005.png b/27238-page-images/p005.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..75a8fd4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p005.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p006.png b/27238-page-images/p006.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..05198e0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p006.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p007.png b/27238-page-images/p007.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..42136b5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p007.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p008.png b/27238-page-images/p008.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b7779e5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p008.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p009.png b/27238-page-images/p009.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..09986f4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p009.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p010.png b/27238-page-images/p010.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9dfcbfe
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p010.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p011.png b/27238-page-images/p011.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9d44418
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p011.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p012.png b/27238-page-images/p012.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3788504
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p012.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p013.png b/27238-page-images/p013.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..35682fc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p013.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p014.png b/27238-page-images/p014.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c966f5c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p014.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p015.png b/27238-page-images/p015.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5e875f2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p015.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p016.png b/27238-page-images/p016.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6e482bd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p016.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p017.png b/27238-page-images/p017.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..177f324
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p017.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p018.png b/27238-page-images/p018.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..045d1f9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p018.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p019.png b/27238-page-images/p019.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..895d95a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p019.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p020.png b/27238-page-images/p020.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bbb1f46
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p020.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p021.png b/27238-page-images/p021.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..306caa2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p021.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p022.png b/27238-page-images/p022.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7367345
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p022.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p023.png b/27238-page-images/p023.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..df4c287
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p023.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p024.png b/27238-page-images/p024.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b6276aa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p024.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p025.png b/27238-page-images/p025.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c7bd14b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p025.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p026.png b/27238-page-images/p026.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cf07cb4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p026.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p027.png b/27238-page-images/p027.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9963327
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p027.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p028.png b/27238-page-images/p028.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..50dc503
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p028.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p029.png b/27238-page-images/p029.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b76262f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p029.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p030.png b/27238-page-images/p030.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..507f7cd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p030.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p031.png b/27238-page-images/p031.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a0a6191
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p031.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p032.png b/27238-page-images/p032.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e69b5dd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p032.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p033.png b/27238-page-images/p033.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e877d10
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p033.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p034.png b/27238-page-images/p034.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..29b8c80
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p034.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p035.png b/27238-page-images/p035.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..072bad7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p035.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p036.png b/27238-page-images/p036.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c525d5b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p036.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p037.png b/27238-page-images/p037.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..18d8102
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p037.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p038.png b/27238-page-images/p038.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b2f8a76
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p038.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p039.png b/27238-page-images/p039.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9d84dca
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p039.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p040.png b/27238-page-images/p040.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1daca72
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p040.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p041.png b/27238-page-images/p041.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d9c77bd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p041.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p042.png b/27238-page-images/p042.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4c11a7f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p042.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p043.png b/27238-page-images/p043.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e0d56db
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p043.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p044.png b/27238-page-images/p044.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..87d478d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p044.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p045.png b/27238-page-images/p045.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ab30242
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p045.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p046.png b/27238-page-images/p046.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8a6c6b9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p046.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p047.png b/27238-page-images/p047.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..492c571
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p047.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p048.png b/27238-page-images/p048.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8c616df
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p048.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p049.png b/27238-page-images/p049.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..418fb54
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p049.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p050.png b/27238-page-images/p050.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..864be76
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p050.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p051.png b/27238-page-images/p051.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bb84659
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p051.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p052.png b/27238-page-images/p052.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3cd828b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p052.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p053.png b/27238-page-images/p053.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0bdd36d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p053.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p054.png b/27238-page-images/p054.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..516ad99
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p054.png
diff --git a/27238-page-images/p055.png b/27238-page-images/p055.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d57f303
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238-page-images/p055.png
diff --git a/27238.txt b/27238.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e074891
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2110 @@
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of Woodworking Tools 1600-1900, by Peter C. Welsh
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: Woodworking Tools 1600-1900
+
+Author: Peter C. Welsh
+
+Release Date: November 12, 2008 [EBook #27238]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ASCII
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WOODWORKING TOOLS 1600-1900 ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Chris Curnow, Joseph Cooper, Greg Bergquist
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+https://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+_Cover design after engraving from Diderot._
+
+
+  CONTRIBUTIONS FROM
+  THE MUSEUM OF HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY:
+
+  PAPER 51
+
+
+
+
+  WOODWORKING TOOLS, 1600-1900
+
+  _Peter C. Welsh_
+
+
+  SPECIALIZATION        183
+
+  CONFIGURATION         194
+
+  CHANGE                214
+
+  BIBLIOGRAPHY          227
+
+  _Peter C Welsh_
+
+
+
+
+WOODWORKING TOOLS
+
+1600-1900
+
+
+     _This history of woodworking hand tools from the 17th to the 20th
+     century is one of a very gradual evolution of tools through
+     generations of craftsmen. As a result, the sources of changes in
+     design are almost impossible to ascertain. Published sources,
+     moreover, have been concerned primarily with the object shaped by
+     the tool rather than the tool itself. The resulting scarcity of
+     information is somewhat compensated for by collections in museums
+     and restorations._
+
+     _In this paper, the author spans three centuries in discussing the
+     specialization, configuration, and change of woodworking tools in
+     the United States._
+
+     THE AUTHOR: _Peter C. Welsh is curator, Growth of the United
+     States, in the Smithsonian Institution's Museum of History and
+     Technology._
+
+In 1918, PROFESSOR W.M.F. PETRIE concluded a brief article on "History
+in Tools" with a reminder that the history of this subject "has yet to
+be studied," and lamented the survival of so few precisely dated
+specimens. What Petrie found so discouraging in studying the implements
+of the ancient world has consistently plagued those concerned with tools
+of more recent vintage. Anonymity is the chief characteristic of hand
+tools of the last three centuries. The reasons are many: first, the tool
+is an object of daily use, subjected while in service to hard wear and,
+in some cases, ultimate destruction; second, a tool's usefulness is apt
+to continue through many years and through the hands of several
+generations of craftsmen, with the result that its origins become lost;
+third, the achievement of an implement of demonstrated proficiency
+dictated against radical, and therefore easily datable, changes in shape
+or style; and fourth, dated survivals needed to establish a range of
+firm control specimens for the better identification of unknowns,
+particularly the wooden elements of tools--handles, moldings, and plane
+bodies--are frustratingly few in non-arid archaeological sites. When
+tracing the provenance of American tools there is the additional problem
+of heterogeneous origins and shapes--that is, what was the appearance
+of a given tool prior to its standardization in England and the United
+States? The answer requires a brief summary of the origin of selected
+tool shapes, particularly those whose form was common to both the
+British Isles and the Continent in the 17th century. Beyond this, when
+did the shape of English tools begin to differ from the shape of tools
+of the Continent? Finally, what tool forms predominated in American
+usage and when, if in fact ever, did any of these tools achieve a
+distinctly American character? In the process of framing answers to
+these questions, one is confronted by a constantly diminishing
+literature, coupled with a steadily increasing number of tool types.[1]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 1.--1685: THE PRINCIPAL TOOLS that the carpenter
+needed to frame a house, as listed by JOHANN AMOS COMENIUS in his _Orbis
+Sensualium Pictus_ were the felling axe (4), wedge and beetle (7 and 8),
+chip axe (10), saw (12), trestle (14), and pulley (15). (Charles Hoole
+transl., London, 1685. _Courtesy of the Folger Shakespeare Library_.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 2.--1685: THE BOXMAKER AND TURNER as pictured by
+Comenius required planes (3 and 5), workbench (4), auger (6), knife (7),
+and lathe (14). (From Johann Amos Comenius, _Orbis Sensualium Pictus.
+Courtesy of the Folger Shakespeare Library_.)]
+
+The literature of the subject, both new and old, is sparse, with
+interest always centering upon the object shaped by the craftsman's tool
+rather than upon the tool itself. Henry Mercer's _Ancient Carpenters'
+Tools_, first published in 1929, is an exception. It remains a rich
+source of information based primarily on the marvelous collections
+preserved by the Bucks County Historical Society. Since 1933, the Early
+American Industries Association, both through collecting and through its
+_Chronicle_, has called attention to the vanishing trades, their tools
+and techniques; the magazine _Antiques_ has occasionally dealt with this
+subject. Historians of economic and industrial development usually
+neglect the tools of the woodcrafts, and when considering the
+toolmakers, they have reference only to the inventors and producers of
+machine tools. The dearth of written material is somewhat compensated
+for by the collections of hand tools in American museums and
+restorations, notably those at Williamsburg, Cooperstown, Old Sturbridge
+Village, Winterthur, the Henry Ford Museum, and Shelburne; at the latter
+in particular the extensive collection has been bolstered by Frank H.
+Wildung's museum pamphlet, "Woodworking Tools at Shelburne Museum."
+The most informative recent American work on the subject is Eric
+Sloane's handsomely illustrated _A Museum of Early American Tools_,
+published in 1964. Going beyond just the tools of the woodworker,
+Sloane's book also includes agricultural implements. It is a delightful
+combination of appreciation of early design, nostalgia, and useful fact.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 3.--1703: THE TOOLS OF THE JOINER illustrated by
+Moxon are the workbench (A), fore plane (B. 1), jointer (B. 2),
+strike-block (B. 3), smoothing plane (B. 4 and B. 7), rabbet plane (B.
+5), plow (B. 6), forming chisels (C. 1 and C. 3), paring chisel (C. 2),
+skew former (C. 4), mortising chisel (sec. C. 5), gouge (C. 6), square
+(D), bevel (F), gauge (G), brace and bit (H), gimlet (I), auger (K),
+hatchet (L), pit saw (M), whipsaw (N), frame saw (O), saw set (Q),
+handsaw (unmarked), and compass saw (E). (Joseph Moxon, _Mechanick
+Exercises_ ..., 3rd ed., London, 1703. Library of Congress.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 4.--1703: ONLY THE PRINCIPAL TOOLS used in
+carpentry are listed by Moxon: the axe (A), adz (B), socket chisel (C),
+ripping chisel (D), drawknife (E), hookpin (F), bevel (G), plumb line
+(H), hammer (I), commander (K), crow (L), and jack (M). (Moxon,
+_Mechanick Exercises_ ..., 1703. Library of Congress.)]
+
+Charles Hummel's forthcoming _With Hammer in Hand: The Dominy Craftsmen
+of East Hampton_--to be published by the Yale University Press--will be
+a major contribution to the literature dealing with Anglo-American
+woodworking tools. Hummel's book will place in perspective Winterthur
+Museum's uniquely documented Dominy Woodshop Collection. This extensive
+collection of tools--over a thousand in number--is rich in attributed
+and dated examples which range from the early 18th through the mid-19th
+century. The literature of the subject has been greatly enhanced by the
+English writer, W.L. Goodman. Extending a series of articles that first
+appeared in the _Journal of The Institute of Handicraft Teachers_,
+Goodman has put together a well-researched _History of Woodworking
+Tools_ (London, 1964), one particularly useful for its wealth of
+illustration from antiquity and the Middle Ages.
+
+
+Specialization
+
+Given the limitations of precise dating, uncertain provenance, and an
+uneven literature, what can be learned about woodworking tools after
+1600? In some instances, design change can be noted and documented to
+provide at least a general criteria for dating. Frequently, the original
+appearance of tools can be documented. For some hand tools,
+characteristics can be established that denote a national origin. Not
+infrequently a tool's style, decorative motif, or similarity to other
+objects that coexisted at a given time can suggest, even in relatively
+modern times, the values of the society that produced it. The source of
+such information derived from the hand tool is generally visual,
+recorded in the tool itself or in pictures of it and supported by
+manuscript and printed material.
+
+Survey the principal printed sources of the 17th, 18th, and 19th
+centuries. The first thing that is apparent is a remarkable
+proliferation of tool types without any significant change in the
+definition and description of the carpenter's or joiner's task. Begin in
+1685 with Charles Hoole's translation of Johann Amos Comenius' _Orbis
+Sensualium Pictus_ for use as a Latin grammar. Among the occupations
+chosen to illustrate vocabulary and usage were the carpenter (fig. 1),
+the boxmaker (cabinetmaker), and the turner (fig. 2). "The Carpenter,"
+according to Hoole's text, "squareth Timber with a Chip ax ... and
+saweth it with a Saw" while the more specialized "Box-maker, smootheth
+hewen-Boards with a Plain upon a Work-board, he maketh them very smooth
+with a little plain, he boarth them thorow with an Augre, carveth them
+with a Knife, fasteneth them together with Glew, and Cramp-irons, and
+maketh Tables, Boards, Chests &c." Hoole repeated Comenius' plates with
+the result that the craftsman's tools and his work have the same
+characteristic medieval flavor as the text.[2]
+
+Joseph Moxon in his well-quoted work on the mechanic arts defined
+joinery as "an Art Manual, whereby several Pieces of Wood are so fitted
+and join'd together by Straight-line, Squares, Miters or any Bevel, that
+they shall seem one intire Piece." Including the workbench, Moxon
+described and illustrated 30 tools (fig. 3) needed by the joiner. The
+carpenter's tools were less favored by illustration; only 13 were
+pictured (fig. 4). The tools that the carpenter used were the same as
+those of the joiner except that the carpenter's tools were structurally
+stronger. The axe serves as a good example of the difference. The
+joiner's axe was light and short handled with the left side of the
+cutting edge bezeled to accommodate one-handed use. The carpenter's axe,
+on the other hand, was intended "to hew great Stuff" and was made deeper
+and heavier to facilitate the squaring and beveling of timbers.[3] By
+mid-18th century the craft of joiner and carpenter had been completely
+rationalized in Diderot's _Encyclopedie_ and by Andre Roubo in his
+_L'Art du menuisier_, a part of Duhamel's _Descriptions des arts et
+metiers_. Diderot, for example, illustrates 14 bench planes alone,
+generally used by the joiner (fig. 5), while Roubo suggests the steady
+sophistication of the art in a plate showing the special planes and
+irons required for fine molding and paneling (fig. 6).
+
+[Illustration: Figure 5.--1769: THE BENCH PLANES OF THE JOINER increased
+in number, but in appearance they remained much the same as those
+illustrated by Moxon. (Denis Diderot, _Recueil de planches sur les
+science et les arts liberaux_, Paris, 1769, vol. 7, "Menuiserie."
+Smithsonian photo 56630.)]
+
+Despite such thoroughness, without the addition of the several plates it
+would be almost impossible to visualize, through the descriptive text
+alone, the work of the carpenter and joiner except, of course, in modern
+terms. This is particularly true of the numerous texts on building, such
+as Batty Langley's _The Builder's Complete Assistant_ (1738) and Francis
+Price's _The British Carpenter_ (1765), where building techniques are
+well described but illustration of tools is omitted. This inadequacy
+grows. In two 19th-century American editions of British works, _The Book
+of Trades_, printed at Philadelphia in 1807, and Hazen's _Panorama of
+the Professions and Trades_ (1838), the descriptions of the carpenter's
+trade are extremely elementary.
+
+Thomas Martin's _Circle of the Mechanical Arts_ (1813), although far
+more thorough than many texts, still defined carpentry "as the art of
+cutting out, framing, and joining large pieces of wood, to be used in
+building" and joinery as "small work" or what "is called by the French,
+_menuiserie_." Martin enumerated 16 tools most useful to the carpenter
+and 21 commonly used by the joiner; in summary, he noted, as had Moxon,
+that "both these arts are subservient to architecture, being employed in
+raising, roofing, flooring and ornamenting buildings of all kinds" (fig.
+7).[4]
+
+In Peter Nicholson's _The Mechanic's Companion_ (figs. 8, 9, and 10),
+the all-too-familiar definition of carpentry as "the art of employing
+timber in the construction of buildings" suggests very little of the
+carpenter's actual work or the improvement in tool design that had
+occurred since Moxon's _Exercises_. From Nicholson's list of the tools
+required by the carpenter--"a ripping saw, a hand saw, an axe, an adze,
+a socket chisel, a firmer chisel, a ripping chisel, an auguer, a gimlet,
+a hammer, a mallet, a pair of pincers, and sometimes planes"--there
+would seem at first glance slight advance since the 1600's. The
+enumeration of the joiner's tools, however, indicates a considerable
+proliferation, particularly when compared to earlier writers. By the
+early 19th century, the more refined work of joinery required over 50
+tools.
+
+     The bench planes [instructed Nicholson] are, the jack plane, the
+     fore plane, the trying plane, the long plane, the jointer, and the
+     smoothing plane; the cylindric plane, the compass and forkstaff
+     planes; the straight block, for straightening short edges. Rebating
+     planes are the moving fillister, the sash fillister, the common
+     rebating plane, the side rebating plane. Grooving planes are the
+     plough and dado grooving planes. Moulding planes are sinking
+     snipebills, side snipebills, beads, hollows and rounds, ovolos and
+     ogees. Boring tools are: gimlets, bradawls, stock, and bits.
+     Instruments for dividing the wood, are principally the ripping saw,
+     the half ripper, the hand saw, the panel saw, the tenon saw, the
+     carcase saw, the sash saw, the compass saw, the keyhole saw, and
+     turning saw. Tools used for forming the angles of two adjoining
+     surfaces, are squares and bevels. Tools used for drawing parallel
+     lines are gauges. Edge tools are the firmer chisel, the mortise
+     chisel, the socket chisel, the gouge, the hatchet, the adze, the
+     drawing knife. Tools for knocking upon wood and iron are, the
+     mallet and hammer. Implements for sharpening tools are the grinding
+     stone, the rub stone, and the oil or whet stone.[5]
+
+Reflecting what the text writers listed, toolmakers by the end of the
+18th century gave buyers a wide choice. The catalogue of Sheffield's
+Castle Hill Works offered 20 combinations of ready-stocked tool chests;
+the simplest contained 12 carpenter's tools and the most complex, 39,
+plus, if desired, an additional assortment of gardening implements (fig.
+11). In 1857, the Arrowmammett Works of Middletown, Connecticut,
+producers of bench and molding planes, published an illustrated
+catalogue that offered 34 distinct types that included everything from
+hollows and rounds to double jointers and hand-rail planes (fig.
+12).[6]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 6.--1774: ANDRE ROUBO'S _L'Art du menuisier_
+contains detailed plates and descriptions of the most specialized of
+woodworking planes: those used to cut panel moldings. The conformation
+of these tools was still distinctly in keeping with the Moxon type and
+suggests that, at least in Europe, no remarkable change had yet occurred
+in the shape of planes. (Andre-Jacob Roubo, _L'Art du menuisier_:
+Troisieme partie, troisieme section, l'art du menuisier ebeniste [Paris,
+1774]. Smithsonian photo 49790-D.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 7.--1813: THOMAS MARTIN ILLUSTRATED ON ONE PLATE
+the tools of the carpenter and joiner dividing them as follows: the
+tools most useful to the carpenter, the axe (7), adz (6), saw (24),
+socket chisel (13), firmer chisel (5), auger (1), gimlet (3), gauge
+(16), square (9), compass (36), hammer (21), mallet (22), hookpin (11),
+crow (12), plumb rule (18), and level (19); and the tools most often
+associated with joinery, the jack plane (30), trying plane (31),
+smoothing plane (34), tenon saw (25), compass saw (26), keyhole saw
+(27), square (8), bevel (23), gauge (17), mortise chisel (4), gouge
+(14), turnscrew (15), plow plane (29), molding plane (35), pincers (37),
+bradawl (10), stock and bit (2), sidehook (20), workbench (28), and rule
+(38). The planes are of particular interest since they show clearly a
+change in form from those previously illustrated. (Thomas Martin, _The
+Circle of the Mechanical Arts_, London, 1813.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 8.--1832: PETER NICHOLSON ILLUSTRATED an
+interesting mixture of old and new forms. An updating of Moxon,
+Nicholson's carpenter required an axe (1), adz (2), socket chisel (3),
+mortise and tenon gauge (4), square (5), plumb rule (6), level (7),
+auger (8), hookpin (9), and crow (10). (Peter Nicholson, _The Mechanic's
+Companion_. 1st American ed., Philadelphia, 1832. Smithsonian photo
+56633.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 9.--1832: THE WORKBENCH DELINEATED BY NICHOLSON
+was little improved over Moxon's, although the planes--jack (1), trying
+plane (2), smoothing plane (3), sash fillister (7), and plow
+(8)--followed the form seen in Martin (fig. 7). The inception of this
+shape occurred in the shops of Sheffield toolmakers in the last half of
+the 18th century, and it persisted until replaced by metallic versions
+patented by American innovators during the last quarter of the 19th
+century. (Nicholson, _The Mechanic's Companion_. Smithsonian photo
+56631.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 10.--1832: THE BRACE AND BIT, GIMLET, CHISELS, AND
+SAWS, having achieved a standard form distinctly different than those of
+Moxon's vintage, were, like the plane, slow to change. The metallic
+version of the brace did not replace the standard Sheffield type (1) in
+the United States until after 1850. For all intent and purpose the saw
+still retains the characteristics illustrated in Nicholson. Of interest
+is Nicholson's comment regarding the saws; namely, that the double
+handle was peculiar to the hand (6) and tenon saws (7), while the
+compass (9) and the sash saws (8) had the single handle. In addition the
+tenon saw was generally backed in iron and the sash saw in brass.
+(Nicholson, _The Mechanic's Companion_. Smithsonian photo 56632.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 11.--EARLY 19TH CENTURY: THE ADVERTISEMENTS OF
+TOOLMAKERS indicated the diversity of production. The Castle Hill Works
+at Sheffield offered to gentlemen 20 choices of tool chests designed to
+appeal to a wide variety of users and purses. The chest was available in
+either oak or mahogany, depending on the gentleman's tastes (fig. 49).
+(Book 87, Cutler and Company, Castle Hill Works, Sheffield. _Courtesy of
+the Victoria and Albert Museum_.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 12.--1857: THE DIVERSITY OF TOOLS available to
+buyers made necessary the illustrated trade catalogue. Although few in
+number in the United States before 1850, tool catalogues became
+voluminous in the last half of the century as printing costs dropped.
+(Smithsonian Institution Library. Smithsonian photo 49790.)]
+
+American inventories reflect the great increase suggested by the early
+technical writers and trade catalogues cited above. Compare the content
+of two American carpenters' shops--one of 1709, in York County,
+Virginia, and the other of 1827, in Middleborough, Massachusetts. John
+Crost, a Virginian, owned, in addition to sundry shoemaking and
+agricultural implements, a dozen gimlets, chalklines, bung augers, a
+dozen turning tools and mortising chisels, several dozen planes (ogees,
+hollows and rounds, and plows), several augers, a pair of 2-foot rules,
+a spoke shave, lathing hammers, a lock saw, three files, compasses,
+paring chisels, a jointer's hammer, three handsaws, filling axes, a
+broad axe, and two adzes. Nearly 120 years later Amasa Thompson listed
+his tools and their value. Thompson's list is a splendid comparison of
+the tools needed in actual practice, as opposed to the tools suggested
+by Nicholson in his treatise on carpentry or those shown in the
+catalogues of the toolmakers.[7] Thompson listed the following:
+
+  1 set bench planes                       $6.00
+
+  1 Broad Axe                               3.00
+
+  1 Adze                                    2.25
+
+  1 Panel saw                               1.50
+
+  1 Panel saw                               1.58
+
+  1 fine do--                               1.58
+
+  1 Drawing knife                            .46
+
+  1 Trying square                            .93
+
+  1 Shingling hatchet                        .50
+
+  1 Hammer                                   .50
+
+  1 Rabbit plane                             .83
+
+  1 Halving do                               .50
+
+  1 Backed fine saw                         1.25
+
+  1 Inch augre                               .50
+
+  1 pr. dividers or compasses--              .71
+
+  1 Panel saw for splitting                 2.75
+
+  1 Tennon gauge                            1.42
+
+  1 Bevel                                    .84
+
+  1 Bradd Hammer                             .50
+
+  1 _Architect Book_                        6.50
+
+  1 Case Mathematical Instruments       3.62-1/2
+
+  1 Panel saw                               2.75
+
+  1 Grafting saw                            1.00
+
+  1 Bench screw                             1.00
+
+  1 Stamp                                   2.50
+
+  1 Double joint rule                    .62-1/2
+
+  1 Sash saw                            1.12-1/2
+
+  1 Oil Can                                  .17
+
+  1 Brace & 36 straw cold bits              9.00
+
+  1 Window Frame tool                       4.00
+
+  1 Blind tool                              1.33
+
+  1 Glue Kettle                          .62-1/2
+
+  1 Grindstone without crank                1.75
+
+  1 Machine for whetting saws                .75
+
+  1 Tennoning machine                       4.50
+
+  Drafting board and square Bevel--         1.25
+
+  1 Noseing sash plane with templets & copes  4.50
+
+  1 pr. clamps for clamping doors           2.17
+
+  1 Set Bench Planes--double irons.--       7.50
+
+  1 Grindstone 300 lbs @                    6.25
+
+  1 Stove for shop--$7.25, one elbow .37 & 40
+  lbs second hand pipe $4.00               11.62
+
+  1 Bed moulding                            2.00
+
+  1 Pr. shears for cutting tin.--            .17
+
+  1 Morticing Machine                      10.75
+
+  1 Grecian Ovilo                           1.13
+
+  1-3/16 beed                                .67
+
+  1 Spirit level                            2.25
+
+  1 Oil stone                                .42
+
+  1 Small trying square                      .48
+
+  1 pareing chisel                           .37
+
+  1 Screw driver                             .29
+
+  1 Bench screw                              .75
+
+  1 Box rule                                 .50
+
+  1-3/4 Augre                                .41
+
+  11 Gouges                                 1.19
+
+  13 Chisels                                1.17
+
+  1 small iron vice                          .52
+
+  1 pr. Hollow Rounds                        .86
+
+  4 Framing chisels                         1.05
+
+  1 Grove plough & Irons--Sold at 4.50      5.00
+
+  1 Sash plane for 1-1/4 stuff              1.50
+
+  1 Copeing plane                            .67
+
+  1 Bead 1/4--                               .75
+
+  1 Bead 3/4                                1.00
+
+  1 Rabbit (Sold at .92)                     .92
+
+  1 Smooth plane                            1.50
+
+  1 Strike Block                             .92
+
+  1 Compass saw                              .42
+
+  6 Gauges                                  1.83
+
+  1 Dust brush                               .25
+
+  1 Rasp, or wood file                       .25
+
+  1 Augre 2 in.                              .76
+
+  1 Augre 1 in.                              .40
+
+  1 Do 3/4                                   .30
+
+  1 Spoke shave                              .50
+
+  1 Bevel--                                  .25
+
+  1 Box rule                                 .84
+
+  1 Iron square                             1.42
+
+  1 Box rule                                1.25
+
+  1 Spur Rabbit (Sold--1.17)                1.33
+
+  1 Pannel plane                            1.25
+
+  1 Sash plane                              1.25
+
+  1 pr. Match planes                        2.25
+
+  1 Two inch chisel or firmer--              .42
+
+  1 Morticing chisel 3/8                     .25
+
+  1 Large screw driver                      1.00
+
+  1 Pr. small clamps                         .50
+
+  1 pr. Spring dividers                      .92
+
+  1 do-nippers                               .20
+
+  1 Morticing chisel 1/2 in.                 .28
+
+  1 Ovilo & Ostrigal 3/4--                  1.25
+
+  1 Scotia & Ostrigal 5/8--                 1.08
+
+  1 Noseing--                               1.08
+
+  1 Pr. Hollow & rounds                     1.33
+
+  1 Ogee-- 1/2 inch                         1.00
+
+  1 Ostrigal 7/8 inch                       1.00
+
+  1 Bit--                                    .15
+
+  1 Beed 1/2 inch                            .83
+
+  1 Claw hammer                              .67
+
+  1 Fillister                               2.50
+
+  2 Beeds at 5/8                            1.83
+
+  1 Pair Quirk tools                        1.50
+
+  1 Side Rabbit plane                        .83
+
+  1 Large steel tongued sq.                 1.71
+
+  1 Saw & Pad                                .67
+
+  1 pr. fire stones                          .50
+
+  1 small trying sq.                         .50
+
+  1 Set Bench planes double ironed without
+      smooth plane                          6.00
+
+  1 Bench screw                              .75
+
+[Illustration: Figure 13.--EARLY 18TH CENTURY: In addition to their
+special function and importance as survivals documenting an outmoded
+technology, the hand tool often combines a gracefulness of line and a
+sense of proportion that makes it an object of great decorative appeal.
+The dividers of the builder or shipwright illustrated here are of French
+origin and may be valued as much for their cultural significance as for
+their technical importance. (Smithsonian photo 49792-G.)]
+
+By 1900, the carpenter's tool chest, fully stocked and fit for the
+finest craftsman, contained 90 or more tools. Specialization is readily
+apparent; the change in, and achievement of, the ultimate design of a
+specific tool is not so easily pinpointed. Only by comparing
+illustrations and surviving examples can such an evolution be
+appreciated and in the process, whether pondering the metamorphosis of a
+plane, a brace and bit, or an auger, the various stages of change
+encountered coincide with the rise of modern industrial society.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 14.--1688: FRONTISPIECE FROM JOHN BROWN, _The
+Description and Use of the Carpenter's Rule_, London, 1688. (Library of
+Congress.)]
+
+
+Configuration
+
+Hand tools are often neglected in the search for the pleasing objects of
+the past. Considered too utilitarian, their decorative appeal--the
+mellow patina of the wood plane or the delicately tapered legs of a pair
+of dividers--often goes unnoticed. Surprisingly modern in design, the
+ancient carpenter's or cabinetmaker's tool has a vitality of line that
+can, without reference to technical significance, make it an object of
+considerable grace and beauty. The hand tool is frequently a lively and
+decorative symbol of a society at a given time--a symbol, which,
+according to the judges at London's Crystal Palace Exhibition in 1851,
+gives "indications of the peculiar condition and habits of the people
+whence they come, of their social and industrial wants and aims, as well
+as their natural or acquired advantages."[8] The hand tool, therefore,
+should be considered both as an object of appealing shape and a document
+illustrative of society and its progress.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 15.--18TH CENTURY: Cabinetmaker's dividers of
+English origin. (Private collection. Smithsonian photo 49789-B.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 16.--1783: CABINETMAKER'S dividers of English
+manufacture, dated, and marked T. Pearmain. See detail, figure 17.
+(Smithsonian photo 49792-C.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 17.--1783: DETAIL OF CABINETMAKER'S DIVIDERS
+showing name and date.]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 18.--18TH CENTURY: Carpenter's dividers of English
+origin, undated. (Smithsonian photo 49792-B.)]
+
+On first sight, it is the conformation rather than any facet of its
+technical or social significance that strikes the eye; perhaps the most
+decorative of tools are early dividers and calipers which, prior to
+their standardization, existed in seemingly endless variety. The great
+dividers used by the shipbuilder and architect for scribing and
+measuring timbers not only indicate building techniques (accession
+61.548) but also document 17th-and early 18th-century decorative
+metalwork, as seen in figure 13. Well before the 17th century, artists
+and engravers recognized them as intriguing shapes to include in any
+potpourri of instruments, either in cartouches or the frontispieces of
+books (fig. 14).
+
+[Illustration: Figure 19.--1855: THE FRONTISPIECE FROM EDWARD SHAW, _The
+Modern Architect_ (Boston, 1855), shows the carpenter's dividers in the
+foreground unchanged in form from those illustrated in figure 18. Of
+further interest in Shaw's plate is the dress of the workmen and the
+balloon frame of the house under construction. (Smithsonian photo
+49792-A.)]
+
+The two pairs of cabinetmaker's dividers illustrated in figures 15 and
+16 suggest significant changes in the design of a basic tool. The
+dividers shown in figure 15 are English and would seem to be of early
+18th-century origin, perhaps even earlier. They are Renaissance in
+feeling with decorated legs and a heart-shaped stop on the end of the
+slide-arm. In character, they are like the great dividers shown in
+figure 13: functional, but at the same time preserving in their
+decoration the features common to a wide variety of ironwork and wares
+beyond the realm of tools alone. The dividers pictured in figure 16 are
+a decided contrast. Dated 1783, they are strongly suggestive of
+Sheffield origin. Gone is the superfluous decoration; in its place is
+the strong, crisp line of a tool that has reached nearly the ultimate of
+function and manufacture, a device which both in general appearance and
+precise design is very modern in execution. Equally intriguing are the
+smaller, more slender dividers (accession 319557) of the 18th-century
+house-builder as seen in figure 18, a form that changed very little, if
+at all, until after 1850--a fact confirmed by the frontispiece of Edward
+Shaw's _The Modern Architect_, published in Boston in 1855 (fig. 19).
+The double calipers of the woodturner (fig. 20) have by far the most
+appealing and ingenious design of all such devices. Designed for
+convenience, few tools illustrate better the aesthetic of the purely
+functional than this pair of 19th-century American calipers.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 20.--EARLY 19TH CENTURY: THE DOUBLE CALIPERS of
+the woodturner permitted double readings to be taken without changing
+the set of the tool. Inherent in this practical design is a gracefulness
+of line seldom surpassed. (Private collection. Smithsonian photo
+49793-C.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 21.--1704: THE FLOOR PLANE OR LONG JOINER of
+Norwegian origin exhibits the characteristic decoration of the stock and
+mouth, patterns common on tools of northern European and Scandinavian
+origin. (_Courtesy of the Norsk Folkemuseum, Oslo, Norway._)]
+
+Intended to establish proportion and to insure precision, it seems a
+natural consequence that dividers and calipers should in themselves
+reflect the same sense of balance and grace that they were designed to
+govern. Still, even the most prosaic examples of woodworking tools,
+completely divorced from the quasi-mathematical devices of measure and
+proportion, have this quality and can be admired solely as decorative
+objects. This is most evident in the three European bench planes
+illustrated in figures 21, 22, and 23: one Norwegian, dated 1704; one
+Dutch (accession 319562), dated 1756; and one German, dated 1809. The
+Norwegian and German examples, with their elaborately carved bodies and
+heart-shaped mouths, are typical of the type that Swedish and German
+colonists in America might have used in the 17th and 18th centuries.
+They are important for that reason. Also, all three exhibit elaboration
+found on other material survivals from these countries in their
+respective periods. For example, the incised rosette of the Dutch plane
+(fig. 22) is especially suggestive of the rosettes found on English and
+American furniture of the 1750's and 1760's, specifically on high
+chests.
+
+The decorative motifs that characterized European tools of the 17th and
+18th centuries obscured technical improvement. By contrast, in England
+and America, tools gained distinction through the directness of their
+design. Following English patterns, tools of American make were
+straightforward. Only later, in new tool types, did they imitate the
+rococo flourish of their European predecessors. In America, as in
+England, the baroque for things functional seemingly had little appeal.
+This is particularly true of woodworking planes on which, unlike their
+continental cousins, embellishment is rarely seen. Exemplifying this
+tradition are three early 19th-century American planes: a plow, for
+cutting channels of various widths on board edges, marked "G. White,
+Philda" (fig. 24); a rabbet, for notching the margin of boards; made
+by E.W. Carpenter of Lancaster, Pennsylvania (fig. 25); and a jack or
+foreplane, for rough surfacing (accession 61.547), made by A. Klock and
+dated 1818 as seen in figure 26.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 22.--1756: THE HIGHLY elaborated stock and
+rosette-incised wedge of the smoothing plane recall the decoration on
+furniture of the period. The plane is of Dutch origin. (Smithsonian
+photo 49792-F.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 23.--1809: THIS BENCH PLANE of German origin is
+dated 1809. It is of a traditional form that persists to the present
+day. The planes pictured in figures 21, 22, and 23 are similar to the
+type brought to North America by non-English colonists. (Private
+collection. Smithsonian photo 49793-F.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 24.--ABOUT 1818: This plow plane, used to cut
+narrow channels on the edges of boards, was made by G. White of
+Philadelphia in the early 19th century. It is essentially the same tool
+depicted in the catalogues of Sheffield manufactures and in the plates
+from Martin and Nicholson. The pattern of the basic bench tools used in
+America consistently followed British design, at least until the last
+quarter of the 19th century. (Private collection. Smithsonian photo
+49794-E.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 25. 1830-1840: THE DESIGN OF the rabbet plane,
+used to cut a groove of fixed width and depth on the edge of a board,
+was not improved upon in the 19th century. The carpenter's dependence on
+this tool lessened only after the perfection of multipurpose metallic
+planes that could be readily converted to cut a "rabbet." (Private
+collection. Smithsonian photo 494789-H).]
+
+The question of dating arises, since only the Klock piece is firmly
+fixed. How, for example, is the early 19th-century attribution arrived
+at for the planes inscribed White and Carpenter? First, the nature of
+the stamped name "G. White" is of proper character for the period.
+Second, G. White is listed in the Philadelphia city directories as a
+"plane-maker" between the years 1818 and 1820, working at the back of 5
+Filbert Street and later at 34 Juliana Street. Third, internal evidence
+on the plane itself gives a clue. In this case, the hardware--rivets and
+furrels--is similar if not identical to that found on firearms of the
+period, weapons whose dates of manufacture are known. The decorative
+molding on the fence of this plane is proper for the period; this is not
+a reliable guide, however, since similar moldings are retained
+throughout the century. Finally, the plane is equipped with a fence
+controlled by slide-arms, fixed with wedges and not by adjustable screw
+arms. After 1830, tools of high quality, such as White's, invariably
+have the screw arms. The rabbet plane, made by Carpenter, is traceable
+via another route, the U.S. Patent Office records. Carpenter,
+self-designated "toolmaker of Lancaster," submitted patents for the
+improvement of wood planes between 1831 and 1849. Examples of
+Carpenter's work, always stamped as shown in figure 27, survive, both
+dated and undated. There are several of his planes in the collections of
+the Bucks County Historical Society, and dated pieces are known in
+private collections.
+
+Inherent in the bench planes is a feeling of motion, particularly in the
+plow and the rabbet where basic design alone conveys the idea that they
+were meant to move over fixed surfaces. Of the three examples, only the
+brass tippings and setscrew of the plow plane suggest any enrichment,
+and of course these were not intended for decoration; in later years,
+however, boxwood, fruitwood, and even ivory tips were added to the more
+expensive factory models. Also unintentional, but pleasing, is the
+distinctive throat of the rabbet plane--a design that developed to
+permit easy discharge of shavings, and one that mass manufacture did
+not destroy.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 26.--1818: THE JACK PLANE, used first by the
+carpenter for rapid surfacing, is distinguished primarily by the bezeled
+and slightly convex edge of its cutting iron. As with the plow and the
+rabbet, its shape is ubiquitous. Dated and marked A. Klock, this
+American example follows precisely those detailed in Sheffield pattern
+books. (Smithsonian photo 49794-C.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 27.--1830-1840: DETAIL OF the rabbet plane (fig.
+25) showing the characteristic stamp of E.W. Carpenter. (Smithsonian
+photo 49794-D.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 28.--ABOUT 1631: THE PRECEDING ILLUSTRATIONS
+emphasize the divergent appearance of European and Anglo-American tools.
+This, however, was not always the case. The woodworker's shop by the
+Dutch engraver Jan Van Vliet suggests the similarity between English and
+European tool types in the 17th century. Note in particular the planes,
+axe, brace, and auger as compared to Moxon. (Library of Congress,
+Division of Prints and Photographs.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 29.--1690: THE CABINETMAKER'S SHOP from Elias
+Pozelius, _Orbus Pictus nach Zeichnugen der Susanna Maria_ _Sandrart_,
+Nuernberg, 1690. (Library of Congress.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 30.--1568: THE WOODWORKER'S SHOP from Hans Sachs,
+_Eygentliche Beschrerbung Aller Stande ... mit Kunstreichen Figuren_ [by
+Jost Amman], Frankfurt, 1568. (Library of Congress.)]
+
+The divergence from European to an Anglo-American hand-tool design and
+the approximate date that it occurred can be suggested by a comparison
+of contemporary illustrations. The change in the wooden bench plane can
+be followed from the early 17th century through its standardization at
+the end of the 18th century. Examine first the planes as drawn in the
+1630's by the Dutchman Jan Van Vliet (fig. 28), an etcher of Rembrandt's
+school at Leiden, and also the examples illustrated by Porzelius (fig.
+29) and by Jost Amman (fig. 30). Compare them to Moxon's plate (fig. 31)
+from the _Mechanick Exercises_ (3rd ed., 1703) and to the splendid
+drawing of the bench plane from Andre-Jacob Roubo's _L'Art du
+menuisier_, published in 1769 (fig. 32). In all of them, the rounded
+handle, or tote, and the fore-horn appear, characteristics of both
+European and English planes of the period before 1750. The similarity
+ends with the mass production of hand tools from the shops of the
+English toolmaking centers, principally Sheffield. An illustration from
+a pattern and design book of the Castle Hill Works, Sheffield, dating
+from the last quarter of the 18th century (fig. 33), shows the achieved,
+familiar form of the bench planes, as well as other tools. The use of
+this form in America is readily documented in Lewis Miller's
+self-portrait while working at his trade in York, Pennsylvania, in 1810
+(fig. 34) and by the shop sign carved by Isaac Fowle in 1820 for John
+Bradford (fig. 35). In each example, the bench plane clearly follows the
+English prototype.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 31.--1703: DETAIL OF THE BENCH PLANES from Moxon's
+_Mechanick Exercises_.]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 32.--1769: ANDRE-JACOB ROUBO'S PRECISE RENDERING
+of the bench plane retains the essential features shown by Moxon--the
+rounded tote or handle and the curved fore-horn. (Andre-Jacob Roubo,
+_L'Art du menuisier_, 1769.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 33.--EARLY 19TH CENTURY: The bench plane
+illustrated in Roubo or Moxon is seldom seen in American tool
+collections. The bench planes, smoothing planes, rabbets, and plows
+universally resemble those shown in this illustration from the pattern
+book of the Castle Hill Works, Sheffield. (Book 87, Cutler and Company,
+Castle Hill Works, Sheffield. _Courtesy of the Victoria and Albert
+Museum._)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 34.--ABOUT 1810: LEWIS MILLER WORKING AT HIS BENCH
+in York, Pa. In a predominantly Pennsylvania-German settlement, the
+plane used by Miller conforms to the Sheffield type illustrated in the
+catalogue of the Castle Hill Works as shown in figure 33. (York County
+Historical Society, York, Pa.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 35.--1820: JOHN BRADFORD'S shop sign carved by
+Isaac Fowle is a unique documentary of early 19th-century tool shapes
+and is in the Bostonian Society, Boston, Mass. (Index of American
+Design, The National Gallery, Washington, D.C.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 36.--1703: THE JOINER'S brace and bit--a detail
+from Moxon, _Mechanick Exercises_ ..., London, 1703. (Library of
+Congress, Smithsonian photo 56635.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 37.--1769: ROUBO'S ILLUSTRATION OF THE BRACE and
+bit differs from Moxon's only in the precision of the delineation.
+Contrast this form with that of the standard Sheffield version in figure
+38 and the metallic braces illustrated in figures 40 through 44. From
+these plates can be seen the progression of the bitstock toward its
+ultimate perfection in the late 19th century. (Andre-Jacob Roubo, _L'Art
+du menuisier_, 1769.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 38.--EARLY 19TH CENTURY: THE MASS-PRODUCED VERSION
+of the wooden brace and bit took the form illustrated in Book 87 of
+Cutler's Castle Hill Works. (_Courtesy of the Victoria and Albert
+Museum._)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 39.--18TH CENTURY: THE TRANSITIONAL FORM of the
+wooden brace and bit incorporated the overall shape of the mass-produced
+version but retained the archaic method of fastening the bit to the
+chuck. The tool is of Dutch origin and suggests the influence of
+Sheffield design on European tools. (Smithsonian photo 49792-E.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 40.--1769: ROUBO ILLUSTRATED THE METALLIC BRACE
+and, in addition, suggested its use as a screwdriver. (Andre-Jacob
+Roubo, _L'Art du menuisier_,1769.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 41.--ABOUT 1775: FORD, WHITMORE AND BRUNTON made
+and sold clockmaker's braces of metal with a sweep and shank that was
+imitated by American patentees in the 19th century. (Catalogue of Ford,
+Whitmore and Brunton, Birmingham, England. _Courtesy of the Birmingham
+Reference Library._)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 42.--1852: NEARLY ONE HUNDRED YEARS after Roubo's
+plate appeared, Jacob Switzer applied for a patent for an "Improved Self
+Holding Screw Driver." The similarity of Switzer's drawing and Roubo's
+plate is striking. (Original patent drawing 9,457, U.S. Patent Office,
+Record Group 241, the National Archives.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 43.--1866: THE SIMPLICITY AND STRENGTH of the
+brace proposed by J. Parker Gordon is in sharp contrast to the heavily
+splinted sides of the wooden brace commonly used in mid-19th-century
+America. (Original patent drawing 52,042, U.S. Patent Office, Record
+Group 241, the National Archives.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 44.--1865: MILTON NOBLES' PATENT perfecting the
+chuck which held the auger bit was an important step along the path
+which led ultimately to the complete acceptance of the metallic brace.
+Barber's ratchet brace shown in figure 66 completes the metamorphosis of
+this tool form in the United States. (Original patent drawing 51,660,
+U.S. Patent Office, Record Group 241, the National Archives.)]
+
+The carpenter's brace is another instance of divergent design after a
+common origin. Refer again to Van Vliet's etching of the woodworker's
+shop (fig. 28), to the detail from Moxon (fig. 36), and from Roubo (fig.
+37). All show the brace in a form familiar since the Middle Ages, a
+shape common to both delineators and craftsmen of the Continent and the
+British Isles. But, as the plane changed, so changed the brace. The
+standard form of this tool as it was used and produced in the United
+States in the 19th century can be seen in another plate from the
+catalogue of the Castle Hill Works at Sheffield (fig. 38). This English
+influence on American tool design is no surprise, since as early as 1634
+William Wood in _New England's Prospect_ suggested that colonists take
+to the New World "All manner of Ironwares, as all manner of nailes for
+houses ... with Axes both broad and pitching ... All manners of Augers,
+piercing bits, Whip-saws, Two handed saws, Froes ..., rings for Bettle
+heads, and Iron-wedges."
+
+[Illustration: Figure 45.--19TH CENTURY: THE UPHOLSTERER'S HAMMER is an
+unknown; it is not dated, its maker is anonymous, as is its user. It is
+of American origin, yet of a style that might have been used in England
+or on the Continent. This lack of provenance need not detract from its
+significance as a material survival. This hammer, the brace (fig. 46),
+the bevel (fig. 47), and the compass saw (fig. 48) are sufficiently
+provocative in their design to conjure some image of a technology
+dependent upon the skilled hand of craftsmen working in wood and of the
+relationship between the hand, the tool, and the finished product.
+(Smithsonian photo 49793-A.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 46.--18TH CENTURY: THE BRACE AND BIT in its
+nonfactory form conforms to a general design pattern in which none of
+the components are ever precisely alike. This aspect of variety of
+detail--sophistication, crudeness, decorative qualities or the
+like--reflects something of the individuality of the toolmaker, a
+quality completely lost in the standardization of the carpenter's brace.
+(Smithsonian photo 49794-A.)]
+
+English tool design in the 18th century also influenced the continental
+toolmakers. This can be seen in figure 39 in a transitional-type
+bitstock (accession 319556) from the Low Countries. Adopting an English
+shape, but still preserving the ancient lever device for holding the bit
+in place, the piece with its grapevine embellishment is a marked
+contrast to the severely functional brass chucks on braces of English
+manufacture. No less a contrast are metallic versions of the brace.
+These begin to appear with some regularity in the U.S. patent
+specifications of the 1840's; their design is apparently derived from
+18th-century precedents. Roubo (fig. 40) illustrated a metal bitstock in
+1769, as did Ford, Whitmore & Brunton, makers of jewelers' and
+watchmakers' tools, of Birmingham, England, in their trade catalogue of
+1775 (fig. 41). Each suggests a prototype of the patented forms of the
+1840's. For example, in 1852, Jacob Switzer of Basil, Ohio, suggested,
+as had Roubo a hundred years earlier, that the bitstock be used as a
+screwdriver (fig. 42); but far more interesting than Switzer's idea was
+his delineation of the brace itself, which he described as "an ordinary
+brace and bit stock" (U.S. pat. 9,457). The inference is that such a
+tool form was already a familiar one among the woodworking trades in the
+United States. Disregarding the screwdriver attachment, which is not
+without merit, Switzer's stock represents an accurate rendering of what
+was then a well-known form if not as yet a rival of the older wooden
+brace. Likewise, J. Parker Gordon's patent 52,042 of 1866 exemplifies
+the strengthening of a basic tool by the use of iron (fig. 43) and, as a
+result, the achievement of an even greater functionalism in design. The
+complete break with the medieval, however, is seen in a drawing
+submitted to the Commissioner of Patents in 1865 (pat. 51,660) by Milton
+V. Nobles of Rochester, New York.[9] Nobles' creation was of thoroughly
+modern design and appearance in which, unlike earlier types, the bit was
+held in place by a solid socket, split sleeve, and a tightening ring
+(fig. 44). In three centuries, three distinct design changes occurred in
+the carpenter's brace. First, about 1750, the so-called English or
+Sheffield bitstock appeared. This was followed in the very early 19th
+century by the reinforced English type whose sides were splinted by
+brass strips. Not only had the medieval form largely disappeared by the
+end of the 18th century, but so had the ancient lever-wedge method of
+fastening the bit in the stock, a device replaced by the pressure-spring
+button on the side of the chuck. Finally, in this evolution, came the
+metallic stock, not widely used in America until after the Civil War,
+that embodied in its design the influence of mass manufacture and in its
+several early versions all of the features of the modern brace and bit.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 47.--18TH CENTURY: The visually pleasing qualities
+of walnut and brass provide a level of response to this joiner's bevel
+quite apart from its technical significance. (Private collection.
+Smithsonian photo 49793-B.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 48.--18TH CENTURY: THE HANDLE OF THE COMPASS SAW,
+characteristically Dutch in shape, is an outstanding example of a
+recurring functional design, one which varied according to the hand of
+the sawer. (Smithsonian photo 49789-C.)]
+
+Henry Ward Beecher, impressed by the growing sophistication of the
+toolmakers, described the hand tool in a most realistic and objective
+manner as an "extension of a man's hand." The antiquarian, attuned to
+more subjective and romantic appraisals, will find this hardly
+sufficient. Look at the upholsterer's hammer (accession 61.35) seen in
+figure 45: there is no question that it is a response to a demanding
+task that required an efficient and not too forceful extension of the
+workman's hand. But there is another response to this implement: namely,
+the admiration for an unknown toolmaker who combined in an elementary
+striking tool a hammerhead of well-weighted proportion to be wielded
+gently through the medium of an extremely delicate handle. In short,
+here is an object about whose provenance one need know very little in
+order to enjoy it aesthetically. In a like manner, the 18th-century
+bitstock of Flemish origin (fig. 46), the English cabinetmaker's bevel
+of the same century (fig. 47), and the compass saw (accession 61.52,
+fig. 48) capture in their basic design something beyond the functional
+extension of the craftsman's hand. The slow curve of the bitstock, never
+identical from one early example to another, is lost in later
+factory-made versions; so too, with the coming of cheap steel, does the
+combination of wood (walnut) and brass used in the cabinetmaker's bevel
+slowly disappear; and, finally, in the custom-fitted pistol-like grip of
+the saw, there is an identity, in feeling at least, between craftsman
+and tool never quite achieved in later mass-produced versions.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 49.--EARLY 19TH CENTURY: THE DESIGNATION
+"GENTLEMAN'S TOOL CHEST" required a chest of "high-style" but
+necessitated no change in the tools it held. (Book 87, Cutler and
+Company, Castle Hill Works, Sheffield. _Courtesy of the Victoria and
+Albert Museum_.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 50.--19TH CENTURY: THE SCREWDRIVER, which began to
+appear regularly on the woodworker's bench after 1800, did not share the
+long evolution and tradition of other Anglo-American tool designs. The
+screwdriver in its early versions frequently had a scalloped blade for
+no other purpose than decoration. (Smithsonian photo 49794.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 51.--1870: THE USE of a new material prompted a
+departure from the traditional in shape and encouraged surface
+elaboration. The tendency, however, was short lived and the
+mass-produced metallic plane rapidly achieved a purity of design as
+pleasing as its wooden predecessors. (Private collection. Smithsonian
+photo 49789.)]
+
+Occasionally, ruling taste is reflected in the design of the carpenter's
+equipment. Notable is the "gentleman's tool chest" (fig. 49) advertised
+in the pattern book of the Castle Hill Works. The bracket feet, brass
+pulls, and inlaid keyholes imitate the style of the domestic chest of
+drawers of the period 1790 to 1810--undoubtedly, features included by
+the manufacturer to appeal to a gentleman of refined taste. In contrast
+to this Sheffield product is the plate from Shaw's _The Modern
+Architect_. The concept of the builder-carpenter as a gentleman still
+prevails, although the idea in this American scene is conveyed in the
+mid-19th century through fashionable dress. The tools and in particular
+the tool chest reflect only the severest of functional lines (fig. 19,
+p. 196).
+
+In deference to ruling taste, some tools lost for a time the clean lines
+that had long distinguished them. The screwdriver, simple in shape
+(accession 61.46) but in little demand until the 1840's, occasionally
+became most elaborate in its factory-made form (fig. 50) and departed
+noticeably from the unadorned style of traditional English and American
+tools. The scalloped blade, influenced by the rival styles rather than a
+technical need, seemed little related to the purpose of the tool.[10]
+No less archaic in decoration was the iron-bodied version of the plow
+plane (fig. 51). The Anglo-American tradition seems completely put
+aside. In its place is a most functional object, but one elaborately
+covered with a shell and vine motif! Patented in 1870 by Charles Miller
+and manufactured by the Stanley Rule and Level Company, this tool in its
+unadorned version is of a type that was much admired by the British
+experts at Philadelphia's Centennial Exhibition in 1876. What prompted
+such superfluous decoration on the plow plane? Perhaps it was to appeal
+to the flood of newly arrived American craftsmen who might find in the
+rococo something reminiscent of the older tools they had known in
+Europe. Perhaps it was simply the transference to the tool itself of the
+decorative work then demanded of the wood craftsmen. Or was it mainly a
+compulsion to dress, with little effort, a lackluster material that
+seemed stark and cold to Victorians accustomed to the ornateness being
+achieved elsewhere with the jigsaw and wood? Whatever the cause, the
+result did not persist long as a guide to hand-tool design. Instead, the
+strong, plain lines that had evolved over two centuries won universal
+endorsement at the Centennial Exhibition. The prize tools reflected
+little of the ornateness apparent in the wares of most of the other
+exhibitors. American makers of edge tools exhibiting at the Centennial
+showed the world not only examples of quality but of attractiveness as
+well.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 52.--19TH CENTURY: THE AMERICAN AXE WAS UNEXCELLED
+in design and ease of use. European observers praised it as distinctly
+American. At the Centennial Exhibition in 1876 Collins and Company of
+New York City was singled out as one of the outstanding manufacturers
+exhibiting these axes, a reputation that persisted. (_Tools for all
+Trades_, Hammacher, Schlemmer and Company, New York, 1896. Smithsonian
+photo 56625.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 53.--1876: DISSTON AND SONS LONG CONTINUED to
+remind prospective buyers of the company's success at the Philadelphia
+Centennial Exhibition by retaining the "Centennial Saw, No. 76" as a
+brand name. (_Illustrated Catalogue_, Baldwin, Robbins and Company,
+Boston, 1894. Smithsonian photo 56627.)]
+
+
+Change
+
+American hand tools in 1876 did not achieve the popular acclaim accorded
+the Corliss engine, yet few products shown by American exhibitors were
+more highly praised by foreign experts. It seems justified to suggest
+that American edge tools displayed at the Centennial had reached their
+high point of development--a metamorphosis that began with the medieval
+European tool forms, moved through a period of reliance on English
+precedents, and ended, in the last quarter of the 19th century, with the
+production of American hand tools "occupying an enviable position before
+the world."[11]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 54.--1809: THE INTRODUCTION of the gimlet-pointed
+auger followed Ezra L'Hommedieu's patent of 1809. From this date until
+its general disuse in the early 20th century, the conformation of the
+tool remained unchanged, although the quality of steel and the precision
+of the twist steadily improved. (Wash drawing from the restored patent
+drawings awarded July 31, 1809, U.S. Patent Office, Record Group 241,
+the National Archives. Smithsonian photo 49790-A.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 55.--1855: RUSSELL JENNINGS' improved auger bits,
+first patented in 1855, received superior citation at the Philadelphia
+Centennial; in the years following, the trade name "Jennings" was seldom
+omitted from trade catalogues. (Original wash drawing, patent drawing
+submitted by R. Jennings, U.S. Patent Office, Record Group 241, the
+National Archives.)]
+
+The tool most highly praised at Philadelphia was the American felling
+axe (fig. 52) "made out of a solid piece of cast steel" with the eye
+"punched out of the solid." When compared to other forms, the American
+axe was "more easily worked," and its shape permitted an easier
+withdrawal after striking.[12]
+
+Sawmakers, too, were singled out for praise--in particular Disston &
+Sons (fig. 53) for "improvements in the form of the handles, and in the
+mode of fixing them to the saw." The Disston saw also embodied an
+improved blade shape which made it "lighter and more convenient by
+giving it a greater taper to the point." Sheffield saws, once supplied
+to most of the world, were not exhibited at Philadelphia, and the
+British expert lamented that our "monopoly remains with us no
+longer."[13]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 56.--1894: THE PERSISTENCE OF "JENNINGS" AS A
+TRADE NAME is suggested by the vignette from the "Illustrated Catalogue"
+of Baldwin, Robbins and Company, published in 1894. (Smithsonian photo
+56628.)]
+
+Augers, essential to "the heavier branches of the building trade ...
+[and] in the workshops of joiners, carpenters, cabinetmakers, turners,
+carvers, and by amateurs and others," were considered a "most important
+exhibit" at the Centennial. The auger had attained a perfection in "the
+accuracy of the twist, the various forms of the cutters, the quality of
+the steel, and fine finish of the twist and polish." The ancient pod or
+shell auger had nearly disappeared from use, to be replaced by "the
+screwed form of the tool" considerably refined by comparison to
+L'Hommedieu's prototype, patented in 1809 (fig. 54). Russell Jennings'
+patented auger bits (figs. 55-56) were cited for their "workmanship and
+quality," and, collectively, the Exhibition "fully established the
+reputation of American augers."[14] Likewise, makers of braces and bits
+were commended for the number of excellent examples shown. Some were a
+departure from the familiar design with "an expansive chuck for the
+bit," but others were simply elegant examples of the traditional brace,
+in wood, japanned and heavily reinforced with highly polished brass
+sidings. An example exhibited by E. Mills and Company, of Philadelphia,
+received a certification from the judges as being "of the best quality
+and finish" (fig. 57). The Mills brace, together with other
+award-winning tools of the company--drawknives, screwdrivers, and
+spokeshaves--is preserved in the collections of the Smithsonian
+Institution (accession 319326). Today as a group they confirm "the
+remarkably fine quality of ... both iron and steel" that characterized
+the manufacture of American edge tools in the second half of the 19th
+century.[15]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 57.--1876: JAPANNED AND SPLINTED WITH HEAVY BRASS,
+this brace was among the award-winning tools exhibited at the Centennial
+by E. Mills and Company of Philadelphia. (Smithsonian photo 49792-D.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 58.--1827: THE BENCH PLANES exhibited at
+Philadelphia in 1876 were a radical departure from the traditional. In
+1827 H. Knowles patented an iron-bodied bench plane that portended a
+change in form that would witness a substitution of steel for wood in
+all critical areas of the tool's construction, and easy adjustment of
+the cutting edge by a setscrew, and an increased flexibility that
+allowed one plane to be used for several purposes. (Wash drawing from
+the restored patent drawings, August 24, 1827, U.S. Patent Office,
+Record Group 241, the National Archives.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 59.--1857: THE ADDITION OF METALLIC PARTS to
+critical areas of wear as suggested by M.B. Tidey did not at first
+radically alter the design of the bench plane. (Wash drawing from U.S.
+Patent Office, March 24, 1857, Record Group 241, the National
+Archives.)]
+
+It is the plane, however, that best exemplifies the progress of tool
+design. In 1876, American planemakers were enthusiastically credited
+with having achieved "an important change in the structure of the
+tool."[16] Although change had been suggested by American patentees as
+early as the 1820's, mass production lagged until after the Civil War,
+and the use of this new tool form was not widespread outside of the
+United States. Hazard Knowles of Colchester, Connecticut, in 1827,
+patented a plane stock of cast iron which in many respects was a
+prototype of later Centennial models (fig. 58).[17] It is evident, even
+in its earliest manifestation, that the quest for improvement of the
+bench plane did not alter its sound design. In 1857, M.B. Tidey (fig.
+59) listed several of the goals that motivated planemakers:
+
+     First to simplify the manufacturing of planes; second to render
+     them more durable; third to retain a uniform mouth; fourth to
+     obviate their clogging; and fifth the retention of the essential
+     part of the plane when the stock is worn out.[18]
+
+By far the greatest number of patents was concerned with perfecting an
+adjustable plane iron and methods of constructing the sole of a plane so
+that it would always be "true." Obviously the use of metal rather than
+the older medium, wood, was a natural step, but in the process of
+changing from the wood to the iron-bodied bench plane there were many
+transitional suggestions that combined both materials. Seth Howes of
+South Chatham, Massachusetts, in U.S. patent 37,694, specified:
+
+     This invention relates to an improvement in that class of planes
+     which are commonly termed "bench-planes," comprising the foreplane,
+     smoothing plane, jack plane, jointer, &c.
+
+     The invention consists in a novel and improved mode of adjusting
+     the plane-iron to regulate the depth of the cut of the same, in
+     connection with an adjustable cap, all being constructed and
+     arranged in such a manner that the plane-iron may be "set" with the
+     greatest facility and firmly retained in position by the adjustment
+     simply of the cap to the plane-iron, after the latter is set, and
+     the cap also rendered capable of being adjusted to compensate for
+     the wear of the "sole" or face of the plane stock.
+
+The stock of Howes' plane was wood combined with metal plates, caps, and
+screws. Thomas Worrall of Lowell was issued patent 17,657 for a plane
+based on the same general principle (fig. 60). Worrall claimed in his
+specifications of June 23, 1857:
+
+     the improved manufacture of [the] carpenter's bench plane or
+     jointer as made with its handle, its wooden stock to which said
+     handle is affixed, and a separate metallic cutter holder, and
+     cutter clamping devices arranged together substantially as
+     specified.
+
+Finally patentees throughout the 19th century, faced with an increasing
+proliferation of tool types, frequently sought to perfect multipurpose
+implements of a type best represented later by the ubiquitous Stanley
+plane. The evolution of the all-purpose idea, which is incidentally not
+peculiar to hand tools alone, can be seen from random statements
+selected from U.S. patents for the improvement of bench planes. In 1864
+Stephen Williams in the specifications of his patent 43,360 stated:
+
+     I denominate my improvement the "universal smoothing plane,"
+     because it belongs to that variety of planes in which the face is
+     made changeable, so that it may be conveniently adapted to the
+     planing of curved as well as straight surfaces. By the use of my
+     improvement surfaces that are convex, concave, or straight may be
+     easily worked, the face of the tool being readily changed from one
+     form to another to suit the surface to which it is to be applied.
+
+The announced object of Theodore Duval's improved grooving plane (pat.
+97,177) was "to produce in one tool all that is required to form grooves
+of several different widths." None was more appealing than Daniel D.
+Whitker's saw-rabbet plane (pat. 52,478) which combined "an adjustable
+saw with an adjustable fence or gage, both being attached to a stock
+with handle similar to a plane, forming together a tool combining the
+properties of the joiner's plow and fillister" (fig. 61). Nor was
+Whitker's idea simply a drawing-board exercise. It was produced
+commercially and was well advertised, as seen in the circular reproduced
+in figure 62.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 60.--1857: IN A VARIETY OF ARRANGEMENTS, the
+addition of metal plates, caps, and screws at the mouth of the plane, as
+shown in Thomas Worrall's drawing, proved a transitional device that
+preserved the ancient shape of the tool and slowed the introduction of
+bench planes made entirely of iron. (Wash drawing from U.S. Patent
+Office, June 23, 1857, Record Group 241, the National Archives.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 61.--1865: NOT ALL MULTIPURPOSE INNOVATIONS
+resulted from the use of new materials. Daniel D. Whitker patented a
+combination saw and rabbet plane little different from one illustrated
+by Andre-Jacob Roubo in his _L'Art du menuisier_ in 1769. (Wash drawing
+from U.S. Patent Office, October 4, 1865, Record Group 241, the National
+Archives.)]
+
+In sum, these ideas produced a major break with the traditional shape of
+the bench plane. William Foster in 1843 (pat. 3,355), Birdsill Holly in
+1852 (pat. 9,094), and W.S. Loughborough in 1859 (pat. 23,928) are
+particularly good examples of the radical departure from the wooden
+block. And, in the period after the Civil War, C.G. Miller (discussed on
+p. 213 and in fig. 63), B.A. Blandin (fig. 64), and Russell Phillips
+(pat. 106,868) patented multipurpose metallic bench planes of excellent
+design. It should be pointed out that the patentees mentioned above
+represent only a few of the great number that tried to improve the
+plane. Only the trend of change is suggested by the descriptions and
+illustrations presented here. The cumulative effect awaited a showcase,
+and the planemakers found it at the Centennial Exhibition of 1876 held
+in Philadelphia.
+
+[Illustration: Figure 62.--ABOUT 1865: THE PROGRESS OF AN IDEA from an
+18th-century encyclopedia through an American patentee to commercial
+reality can be seen in this flier advertising Whitker's saw-rabbet.
+(Smithsonian Institution Library. Smithsonian photo 56629.)]
+
+The impact of these new planes at the Exhibition caused some
+retrospection among the judges:
+
+     The planes manufactured in Great Britain and in other countries
+     fifty years ago were formed of best beech-wood; the plane irons
+     were of steel and iron welded together; the jointer plane, about 21
+     inches long, was a bulky tool; the jack and hand planes were of the
+     same materials. Very little change has been made upon the plane in
+     Great Britain, unless in the superior workmanship and higher
+     quality of the plane iron.[19]
+
+The solid wood-block plane, varying from country to country only in the
+structure of its handles and body decoration, had preserved its
+integrity of design since the Middle Ages. At the Centennial, however,
+only a few examples of the old-type plane were exhibited. A new shape
+dominated the cases. Designated by foreign observers as the American
+plane, it received extended comment. Here was a tool
+
+     constructed with a skeleton iron body, having a curved wooden
+     handle; the plane iron is of the finest cast-steel; the cover is
+     fitted with an ingenious trigger at the top, which, with a screw
+     below the iron, admits of the plane iron being removed for
+     sharpening and setting without the aid of the hammer, and with the
+     greatest ease. The extensive varieties of plane iron in use are
+     fitted for every requirement; a very ingenious arrangement is
+     applied to the tools for planing the insides of circles or other
+     curved works, such as stair-rails, etc. The sole of the plane is
+     formed of a plate of tempered steel about the thickness of a
+     handsaw, according to the length required, and this plate is
+     adapted to the curve, and is securely fixed at each end. With this
+     tool the work is not only done better but in less time than
+     formerly. In some exhibits the face of the plane was made of beech
+     or of other hard wood, secured by screws to the stock, and the tool
+     becomes a hybrid, all other parts remaining the same as in the iron
+     plane.[20]
+
+The popularity of Bailey's patented planes (fig. 65), the type so
+praised above, was by no means transitory. In 1884 the Boston firm of
+Goodnow & Wightman, "Importers, Manufacturers and Dealers in Tools of
+all kinds," illustrated the several planes just described and assured
+prospective buyers that
+
+     These tools meet with universal approbation from the best
+     Mechanics. For beauty of style and finish they are unequalled, and
+     the great convenience in operating renders them the cheapest Planes
+     in use; they are SELF-ADJUSTING in every respect; and each part
+     being made INTERCHANGEABLE, can be replaced at a trifling
+     expense.[21]
+
+By 1900 an advertisement for Bailey's planes published in the catalogue
+of another Boston firm, Chandler and Farquhar, indicated that "over
+900,000" had already been sold.[22]
+
+Other mass-produced edge tools--axes, adzes, braces and bits, augers,
+saws, and chisels--illustrated in the trade literature of the toolmakers
+became, as had the iron-bodied bench plane, standard forms. In the last
+quarter of the 19th century the tool catalogue replaced Moxon, Duhamel,
+Diderot, and the builders' manuals as the primary source for the study
+and identification of hand tools. The Centennial had called attention to
+the superiority of certain American tools and toolmakers. The result was
+that until the end of the century, trade literature faithfully drummed
+the products that had proven such "an attraction to the numerous
+artisans who visited the Centennial Exhibition from the United States
+and other countries."[23]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 63.--1870: THE METALLIC VERSION OF THE PLOW PLANE
+later produced by Stanley and Company was patented by [Charles] G.
+Miller as a tool readily "convertible into a grooving, rabbeting, or
+smoothing plane." In production this multipurpose plow gained an
+elaborate decoration (fig. 51) nowhere suggested in Miller's
+specification. (Wash drawing from U.S. Patent Office, June 28, 1870,
+Record Group 241, the National Archives.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 64.--1867: THE DRAWING accompanying B.A. Blandin's
+specification for an "Improvement in Bench Planes" retained only the
+familiarly shaped handle or tote of the traditional wood-bodied plane.
+This new shape rapidly became the standard form of the tool with later
+variations chiefly related to the adjustability of the plane-iron and
+sole. (Wash drawing from U.S. Patent Office, May 7, 1867, Record Group
+241, the National Archives.)]
+
+Collins and Company of New York City had been given commendation for the
+excellence of their axes; through the end of the century, Collins' brand
+felling axes, broad axes, and adzes were standard items, as witness
+Hammacher, Schlemmer and Company's catalogue of 1896.[24] Disston saws
+were a byword, and the impact of their exhibit at Philadelphia was still
+strong, as judged from Baldwin, Robbins' catalogue of 1894. Highly
+recommended was the Disston no. 76, the "Centennial" handsaw with its
+"skew back" and "apple handle." Jennings' patented auger bits were
+likewise standard fare in nearly every tool catalogue.[25] So were bench
+planes manufactured by companies that had been cited at Philadelphia for
+the excellence of their product; namely, The Metallic Plane Company,
+Auburn, New York; The Middletown Tool Company, Middletown, Connecticut;
+Bailey, Leonard, and Company, Hartford; and The Sandusky Tool Company,
+Sandusky, Ohio.[26]
+
+An excellent indication of the persistence of the Centennial influence,
+and of the tool catalogue as source material, is seen in Chandler and
+Farquhar's illustrated pamphlet of 1900. Their advertisement for
+Barber's improved ratchet brace (fig. 66), a tool much admired by the
+Centennial judges, amply illustrates the evolution of design of a basic
+implement present in American society since the first years of
+settlement. The Barber brace represents the ultimate sophistication of a
+tool, achieved through an expanded industrial technology rather than by
+an extended or newly found use for the device itself. It is a prime
+example of the transition of a tool from Moxon to its perfected form in
+the 20th century:
+
+     These Braces possess the following points of superiority: The Sweep
+     is made from Steel; the Jaws are forged from Steel; the Wood Handle
+     has brass rings inserted in each end so it cannot split off; the
+     Chuck has a hardened Steel antifriction washer between the two
+     sockets, thus reducing the wear. The Head has a bearing of steel
+     balls, running on hard steel plates, so no wear can take place, as
+     the friction is reduced to the minimum. The Brace is heavily
+     nickel-plated and warranted in every particular. We endeavor to
+     make these goods as nearly perfection as is possible in durability,
+     quality of material and workmanship, and fineness and beauty of
+     finish.[27]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 65.--1900: AMERICAN PLANEMAKERS had been cited at
+the Philadelphia Centennial as having introduced a dramatic change in
+the nature of the tool. Although wood-bodied planes continued to be
+used, they were outdated and in fact anachronistic by the close of the
+19th century. From the 1870's forward, it was the iron-bodied plane,
+most frequently Bailey's, that enlivened the trade literature.
+(Catalogue of Chandler and Farquhar, Boston, 1900. Smithsonian photo
+55798.)]
+
+[Illustration: Figure 66.--1900: FEW TOOLS SUGGEST MORE CLEARLY the
+influence of modern industrial society upon the design and construction
+of traditional implements than Barber's ratchet brace. It is not without
+interest that as the tools of the wood craftsman became crisply
+efficient, his work declined correspondingly in individuality and
+character. The brace and the plane, as followed from Moxon through the
+trade literature of the late 19th century, achieved perfection in form
+and operation at a time when their basic functions had been usurped by
+machines. (Catalogue of Chandler and Farquhar, Boston, 1900. Smithsonian
+photo 56626.)]
+
+The description of Barber's brace documents a major technical change:
+wood to steel, leather washers to ball bearings, and natural patina to
+nickel plate. It is also an explanation for the appearance and shape of
+craftmen's tools, either hand forged or mass produced. In each case, the
+sought-after result in the form of a finished product has been an
+implement of "fineness and beauty." This quest motivated three centuries
+of toolmakers and brought vitality to hand-tool design. Moxon had
+advised:
+
+  He that will a good Edge win,
+  Must Forge thick and Grind thin.[28]
+
+If heeded, the result would be an edge tool that assured its owner "ease
+and delight."[29] Throughout the period considered here, the most
+praiseworthy remarks made about edge tools were variations of either
+"unsurpassed in quality, finish, and beauty of style" or, more simply,
+commendation for "excellent design and superior workmanship."[30] The
+hand tool thus provoked the same value words in the 19th as in the 17th
+century.
+
+The aesthetics of industrial art, whether propounded by Moxon or by an
+official at the Philadelphia Centennial, proved the standard measure by
+which quality could be judged. Today these values are particularly valid
+when applied to a class of artifacts that changed slowly and have as
+their prime characteristics anonymity of maker and date. With such
+objects the origin, transition, and variation of shape are of primary
+interest. Consider the common auger whose "Office" Moxon declared "is to
+make great round holes" and whose importance was so clearly stressed at
+Philadelphia in 1876.[31] Neither its purpose nor its gross appearance
+(a T-handled boring tool) had changed. The tool did, however, develop
+qualitatively through 200 years, from a pod or shell to a spiral bit,
+from a blunt to a gimlet point, and from a hand-fashioned to a
+geometrically exact, factory-made implement: innovations associated with
+Cooke (1770), L'Hommedieu (1809), and Jennings (1850's). In each
+instance the tool was improved--a double spiral facilitated the
+discharge of shavings, a gimlet point allowed the direct insertion of
+the auger, and machine precision brought mathematical accuracy to the
+degree of twist. Still, overall appearance did not change. At the
+Centennial, Moxon would have recognized an auger, and, further, his
+lecture on its uses would have been singularly current. The large-bore
+spiral auger still denoted a mortise, tenon, and trenail mode of
+building in a wood-based technology; at the same time its near cousin,
+the wheelwright's reamer, suggested the reliance upon a transport
+dependent upon wooden hubs. The auger in its perfected form--fine steel,
+perfectly machined, and highly finished--contrasted with an auger of
+earlier vintage will clearly show the advance from forge to factory, but
+will indicate little new in its method of use or its intended purpose.
+
+Persons neither skilled in the use of tools nor interested in technical
+history will find that there is another response to the common auger, as
+there was to the upholsterer's hammer, the 18th-century brace, or the
+saw with the custom-fitted grip. This is a subjective reaction to a
+pleasing form. It is the same reaction that prompted artists to use
+tools as vehicles to help convey lessons in perspective, a frequent
+practice in 19th-century art manuals. The harmony of related parts--the
+balance of shaft and handle or the geometry of the twist--makes the
+auger a decorative object. This is not to say that the ancient
+woodworker's tool is not a document attesting a society's technical
+proficiency--ingenuity, craftsmanship, and productivity. It is only to
+suggest again that it is something more; a survival of the past whose
+intrinsic qualities permit it to stand alone as a bridge between the
+craftsman's hand and his work; an object of considerable appeal in which
+integrity of line and form is not dimmed by the skill of the user nor by
+the quality of the object produced by it.
+
+In America, this integrity of design is derived from three centuries of
+experience: one of heterogeneous character, the mid-17th to the
+mid-18th; one of predominately English influence, from 1750 to 1850; and
+one that saw the perfection of basic tools, by native innovators,
+between 1850 and the early 20th century. In the two earlier periods, the
+woodworking tool and the products it finished had a natural affinity
+owing largely to the harmony of line that both the tool and finished
+product shared. The later period, however, presents a striking contrast.
+Hand-tool design, with few exceptions, continued vigorous and functional
+amidst the confusion of an eclectic architecture, a flurry of rival
+styles, the horrors of the jigsaw, and the excesses of Victorian taste.
+In conclusion, it would seem that whether seeking some continuous thread
+in the evolution of a national style, or whether appraising American
+contributions to technology, such a search must rest, at least in part,
+upon the character and quality of the hand tools the society has made
+and used, because they offer a continuity largely unknown to other
+classes of material survivals.
+
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1] W.M. FLINDERS PETRIE, "History in Tools," _Annual Report Smithsonian
+Institution_, 1918, pp. 563-572 [reprint].
+
+[2] JOHANN AMOS COMENIUS, _Orbis Sensualium Pictus_, transl. Charles
+Hoole (London, 1685), pp. 130, 143.
+
+[3] JOSEPH MOXON, _Mechanick Exercises or the Doctrine of Handy-Works_,
+3rd. ed. (London, 1703), pp. 63, 119.
+
+[4] MARTIN, _Circle of the Mechanical Arts_ (1813), p. 123.
+
+[5] PETER NICHOLSON, _The Mechanic's Companion_ (Philadelphia, 1832),
+pp. 31, 89-90.
+
+[6] _Catalog_, Book 87, Cutler and Co., Castle Hill Works, Sheffield [in
+the collections of the Victoria and Albert Museum, London]; and
+_Illustrated Supplement to the Catalogue of Bench Planes_, Arrowmammett
+Works (Middletown, Conn., 1857) [in the Smithsonian Institution
+Library].
+
+[7] York County Records, Virginia Deeds, Orders, and Wills, no. 13
+(1706-1710), p. 248; and the inventory of Amasa Thompson in LAWRENCE B.
+ROMAINE, "A Yankee Carpenter and His Tools," _The Chronicle_ of the
+Early American Industries Association (July 1953), vol. 6, no. 3, pp.
+33-34.
+
+[8] _Reports by the Juries: Exhibition of the Works of Industry of All
+Nations, 1851_ (London, 1852), p. 485.
+
+[9] U.S. patent specifications cited in this paragraph may be found at
+the U.S. Patent Office, Washington, D.C.
+
+[10] In 1865 George Parr in his application for an improved screwdriver
+stated categorically that the scalloped blade served no purpose other
+than decoration. See U.S. patent 45,854, dated January 10, 1865.
+
+[11] Francis A. Walker, ed., _United States Centennial Commission,
+International Exhibition, 1876, Reports and Awards, Group XV_
+(Philadelphia, 1877), p. 5.
+
+[12] Ibid., p. 6.
+
+[13] Ibid., pp. 9-10.
+
+[14] Ibid., pp. 11-12.
+
+[15] Ibid., pp. 14, 44, 5.
+
+[16] Ibid., p. 13.
+
+[17] Restored patent 4,859X, August 24, 1827, National Archives,
+Washington, D.C.
+
+[18] U.S. pat. 16,889, U.S. Patent Office, Washington, D.C. The numbered
+specifications that follow may be found in the same place.
+
+[19] Walker, ed., _Reports and Awards_, group 15, p. 13.
+
+[20] Ibid.
+
+[21] _Tools_ (Boston, 1884), p. 54 [in the Smithsonian Institution
+Library].
+
+[22] _Tools and Supplies_ (June 1900), no. 85 [in the Smithsonian
+Institution Library].
+
+[23] Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), p. 14.
+
+[24] _Tools for All Trades_ (New York, 1896), item 75 [in the
+Smithsonian Institution Library].
+
+[25] See _Baldwin, Robbins & Co.: Illustrated Catalogue_ (Boston, 1894),
+pp. 954, 993 [in the Smithsonian Institution Library].
+
+[26] Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), p. 14.
+
+[27] _Tools and Supplies_, op. cit. (footnote 22).
+
+[28] _Mechanick Exercise_ ..., p. 62.
+
+[29] Ibid., p. 95.
+
+[30] Walker, op. cit. (footnote 19), pp. 31-49.
+
+[31] _Mechanick Exercises_ ..., p. 94.
+
+
+
+
+BIBLIOGRAPHY
+
+
+_Book of trades, or library of the useful arts._ 1st Amer. ed.
+Whitehall, N.Y., 1807.
+
+_Boy's book of trades._ London, 1866.
+
+_The cabinetmaker in eighteenth-century Williamsburg._ (Williamsburg
+Craft Series.) Williamsburg, Va., 1963.
+
+COMENIUS, JOHANN AMOS. _Orbis sensualium pictus._ Transl. Charles Hoole.
+London, 1664, 1685, 1777, et al.
+
+COTTER, JOHN L. _Archeological excavations at Jamestown, Virginia._ (No.
+4 in Archeological Research Series.) Washington: National Park Service,
+1958.
+
+DIDEROT, DENIS. _L'encyclopedie, ou dictionnaire raisonne des sciences,
+des arts et des metiers._ Paris, 1751-1765.
+
+EARLY AMERICAN INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION. _Chronicle._ Williamsburg, Va.,
+1933+.
+
+GILLISPIE, CHARLES COULSTON, ed. _A Diderot pictorial encyclopedia of
+trades and industry._ New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1959.
+
+GOODMAN, W.L. _The history of woodworking tools._ London: G. Bell and
+Sons, Ltd., 1964.
+
+HOLTZAPFFEL, CHARLES. _Turning and mechanical manipulations._ London
+[1846].
+
+KNIGHT, EDWARD HENRY. _Knight's American mechanical dictionary._ New
+York, 1874-1876.
+
+MARTIN, THOMAS. _The circle of the mechanical arts._ London, 1813.
+
+MERCER, HENRY C. _Ancient carpenters' tools._ Doylestown, Pennsylvania:
+The Bucks County Historical Society, 1951.
+
+MOXON, JOSEPH. _Mechanick exercises._ 3rd ed. London, 1703.
+
+NICHOLSON, PETER. _The mechanic's companion._ Philadelphia, 1832.
+
+PETERSEN, EUGENE T. _Gentlemen on the frontier: A pictorial record of
+the culture of Michilimackinac._ Mackinac Island, Mich., 1964.
+
+PETRIE, SIR WILLIAM MATTHEW FLINDERS. _Tools and weapons illustrated by
+the Egyptian collection in University College, London._ London, 1917.
+
+ROUBO, ANDRE-JACOB. _L'art du menuisier._ (In Henri-Louis Duhamel du
+Monceau, _Descriptions des arts et metiers_.) Paris, 1761-1788.
+
+SACHS, HANS. _Das Staendebuch: 114 Holzschnitte von Jost Amman, mit
+Reimen von Hans Sachs._ Leipzig: Insel-Verlag, 1934.
+
+SINGER, CHARLES, et al. _A history of technology._ 5 vols. New York and
+London: Oxford University Press, 1954-1958.
+
+SLOANE, ERIC. _A museum of early American tools._ New York: Wilfred
+Funk, Inc., 1964.
+
+TOMLINSON, CHARLES. _Illustrations of trades._ 2nd ed. London, 1867.
+
+WELSH, PETER C. "The Decorative Appeal of Hand Tools," _Antiques_, vol.
+87, no. 2, February 1965, pp. 204-207.
+
+---- U.S. patents, 1790-1870: New uses for old ideas. Paper 48 in
+_Contributions from the Museum of History and Technology:_ Papers 45-53
+(U.S. National Museum Bulletin 241), by various authors; Washington:
+Smithsonian Institution, 1965.
+
+WILDUNG, FRANK H. _Woodworking tools at Shelburne Museum._ (No. 3 in
+Museum Pamphlet Series.) Shelburne, Vermont: The Shelburne Museum, 1957.
+
+
+  U.S. Government Printing Office: 1966
+
+  For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
+  Office Washington, D.C., 20402--Price 70 cents
+
+  _Paper 51, pages 178-228, from_ UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN
+
+  [Illustration]
+
+  CONTRIBUTIONS FROM
+  THE MUSEUM OF HISTORY
+  AND TECHNOLOGY
+
+  SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION . WASHINGTON, D.C.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of Project Gutenberg's Woodworking Tools 1600-1900, by Peter C. Welsh
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WOODWORKING TOOLS 1600-1900 ***
+
+***** This file should be named 27238.txt or 27238.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        https://www.gutenberg.org/2/7/2/3/27238/
+
+Produced by Chris Curnow, Joseph Cooper, Greg Bergquist
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+https://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+https://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at https://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit https://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     https://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/27238.zip b/27238.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..87ab6c5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27238.zip
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d7a8fcc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #27238 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/27238)