by independent methods; and this is confirmed
by the circumstance that though the results achieved by the respective
inventors were the same, the methods employed by them were in many
respects different. As regards Clement, we find that previous to the
year 1820 he had a machine in regular use for planing the triangular
bars of lathes and the sides of weaving-looms. This instrument was
found so useful and so economical in its working, that Clement
proceeded to elaborate a planing machine of a more complete kind, which
he finished and set to work in the year 1825. He prepared no model of
it, but made it direct from the working drawings; and it was so nicely
constructed, that when put together it went without a hitch, and has
continued steadily working for more than thirty years down to the
present day.

Clement took out no patent for his invention, relying for protection
mainly on his own and his workmen's skill in using it. We therefore
find no specification of his machine at the Patent Office, as in the
case of most other capital inventions; but a very complete account of
it is to be found in the Transactions of the Society of Arts for 1832,
as described by Mr. Varley. The practical value of the Planing Machine
induced the Society to apply to Mr. Clement for liberty to publish a
full description of it; and Mr. Varley's paper was the result.[3] It
may be briefly stated that this engineer's plane differs greatly from
the carpenter's plane, the cutter of which is only allowed to project
so far as to admit of a thin shaving to be sliced off,--the plane
working flat in proportion to the width of the tool, and its length and
straightness preventing the cutter from descending into any hollows in
the wood. The engineer's plane more resembles the turning-lathe, of
which indeed it is but a modification, working up on the same
principle, on flat surfaces. The tools or cutters in Clement's machine
were similar to those used in the lathe, varying in like manner, but
performing their work in right lines,--the tool being stationary and
the work moving under it, the tool only travelling when making lateral
cuts. To save time two cutters were mounted, one to cut the work while
going, the other while returning, both being so arranged and held as to
be presented to the work in the firmest manner, and with the least
possible friction. The bed of the machine, on which the work was laid,
passed under the cutters on perfectly true