My dear Mr. Cox
I was too worried Saturday morning to be coherent. I had just come from the doctor’s and my talk with him had worn me out. Therefore I am putting into writing the information which I was trying to give you.
The Langley machine-so-called was tried Saturday morning and the two rear wings collapsed. We had a man there who saw the trial and who took pictures of the wreck. He was compelled to give up the films, the Curtiss people explaining that because of “legal complications” they could allow no pictures to be taken. Orville wishes nothing said about it now, for important reasons. Curtiss does not know that Orville knows anything about this.
It is rather interesting to follow up the reasons why the Smithsonian is allowing one of its historical exhibits to be kept at the Curtiss factory for more than a year, to help Curtiss out of his “legal complications”. The machine at Hammondsport has never been a restoration or reproduction of the original Langley machine which Langley tried to fly in 1903, nine days before Wilbur and Orville made their first flights. But the amusing thing is that the machine is changed every few months. Still they talk of it as Langley’s machine.
It is hard to make most people believe that the Smithsonian would let itself be used except for the furtherance of “scientific” ends. I am hopeful that you will understand.
Secretary Walcott may have been perfectly honest in letting the Langley machine go out of the Museum, hoping that it could be shown that Langley had produced a machine that would fly, but had been cheated out of the deserved honor because of a defective launching gear. It was natural that he should have great interest in preserving Langley’s memory. Langley was a warm personal friend of his and his own position as Langley’s successor would be more honorable and conspicuous. He may have been actuated by the desire to secure just recognition for Langley.
If that was his motive, it seems strange that he took no precaution to see that the historical relic, left by Langley, was preserved, to be shown for future generations. An exact copy could have been made for experimental purposes. But instead, the original machine was allowed to be taken out and changes made in it so that no one can ever know what the machine was that Langley built and tried to fly on December 8, 1903 , the date of his last experiments. It may be that Walcott does not know that changes have been made. At the very least, he has been careless.
The head of the Aerodynamic Laboratory of the Smithsonian is a man by the name of Zahm, a so called scientist whose scientific computations, as a expert witness for Curtiss, were proved to be in error, anywhere from twenty per cent to one thousand per cent. After Wilbur got through with him, the Curtiss lawyer was so flabbergasted that he said “Experts? D…. the experts. I don’t want to see any more experts.” This man Zahm is financially interested in the outcome of the litigation. It is to him and Curtiss, who has already been decided, by the court, to be infringing inventor’s patents, that the Secretary of the Smithsonian entrusts the historical Langley machine, for the purpose of vindicating a dead inventor. Wasn’t that “quaint”?
In the next place, the Smithsonian was trying to get an appropriation from Congress, for this Aerodynamic Laboratory of Zahm’s. It is said now by the Curtiss people that these efforts in Langley’s behalf were for the purpose of convincing Congress that no mistakes had been made when Congress voted an appropriation of $50,000 to Langley, for experimental purposes, for which, as you know, they were criticized. It was hoped to get $50,000 more for this “scientist” Zahm to spend.
Mr. Wilt sent us the Congressional Record for the day of the discussion in Congress. Mr. Mann said that it had been proved now that Langley was the real inventor of the flying machine and that the Laboratory, named in his honor, should have a liberal appropriation-or words to about that effect. Our congressman rose to the occasion by saying that he hoped that “the young Dayton Mechanics” would not be entirely forgotten or something about as forcible and discriminating! It remained for someone in Minnesota, Sharp I believe was the name, to say that he had had some doubts about those experiments at Hammondsport, that the courts had just given a decision, sustaining the Wrights in their patents and that Curtiss, who had been conducting those experiments, was the man who had been making money by infringing the patents. He thought they had better be careful, in their zeal to do justice to a dead inventor, that they didn’t do injustice to the living. The appropriation failed. It was this incident in Congress that made me say that we often wish you were back in Congress. I can imagine that you would have something to say, besides making a faint plea for the “young Dayton mechanics”! Now I want to watch up that thing in Congress, because those people in Washington are never idle - my brothers enemies I mean - and it would be so much fun to blow up some of their clever schemes.
We’re not jealous of Langley. He was an honorable man and he tried to solve the problem of flight. He didn’t succeed but his belief in the possibility of its solution had much to do with my brothers taking up the study and sticking to it. They have always said that they felt under obligation to Langley and that has been twisted to make it appear that Langley’s work was the basis of their success.
All this would have taken care of itself, if it had not been for the fight over the patent. The Court of Appeals, in its decision of Jan. 13, 1915, said, “The Wrights may fairly be considered pioneers in the art of flying and therefore are entitled to a liberal interpretation of their claims”. It was Curtiss’ hope to stir up public opinion so that he would have sympathy in his fight. He is clever and has no scruples. He always gets away with his schemes for a year or two, until it can be proved that he is not telling the truth. Then he turns to some new lie.
That Langley fake of last summer was so raw that it seems incredible that it could have succeeded, Curtis and Zahm got possession of the old machine, took it to Hammondsport, changed it until they thought they had it strong enough so it wouldn’t collapse, called in the reporters who knew nothing about the original machine, told them this was “Langley’s Folly” told them it only failed in Langley’s day because of a trifling defect in the launching mechanism, told them that they were about to vindicate Langley who had died of a broken heart because his invention had gone to the Wrights etc., etc., until the proper psychological effect had been obtained. Then the machine was taken out, run along the water, lifted off for a distance of about forty or fifty feet, at a height of three or four feet, when it lost its momentum it fell back to the water. It wasn’t a flight at all-only a hop. Lyman Seeley of the Curtis Company never gave out the report that a flight had been made. True, the Curtiss Company did not give out the report. Zahm spent three or four hours preparing a statement for the newspapers, explaining at length how Langley had invented the airplane etc. etc. but speaking very briefly and vaguely about the flight. He was afraid to put that down in writing. The newspaper reporters did the rest. The N.Y. World man reported to his paper that “Langleys Folly” had sailed round and round at a height of several hundred feet. Others made their stories a little more moderate, in varying degrees. The Tribune man reported that there was doubt whether any flight had been accomplished. But the editors all over the country shed barrels of tears over the injustice to Langley. Dozens of them announced on the spot that Langley had really invented the flying machine but the Wrights, by being skillful aerobats and skilled mechanics had stolen the credit etc. etc.
Now these editors did not know that the machine was not Langley’s at all. No one ever thought of that! They did not know that the ribs were made stronger; that the shape of the surfaces had been changed; that the shape of the propellers had been changed; that the trussing of the frame had been changed and greatly strengthened, that the Langley steering had been taken off and the Curtiss steering gear, including the shoulder yoke, which operated the vertical tail (a part of the Wright patent, a thing Langley never heard of !) had been substituted, that the Langley launching scheme had been given up entirely and Curtiss floats substituted.
I think it important to have a few people of sense, force, and resourcefulness understand this thing. It seems to me that when the case comes to trial on June 21st it would be the right time to expose the fraud.
Sincerely,
Katherine Wright
sniper87
katherine_wrights_letter.docx
0
