SYDNEY INTERNATIONAL EXHIBITION.—1879-1880.

Extracts from the Report of the Judges in Horology.

DEPARTMENT III.—EDUCATION AND SCIENCE.

Group—Scientific and Philosophical Instruments and Methods.

Class 310.—Chronometric Apparatus, Chronometers, Astronomical Clocks, Watches, Chronographs, etc., etc.

Judges.—John McGarvie Smith, New South Wales.
P. E. Bound, Switzerland.
H. C. Russell, B.A., F.R.A.S., Great Britain.
E. Beckmann, Germany.
Gregory P. Harte, United States.

To the Honorable Committee on Judging and Awards, Sydney International Exhibition.

Gentlemen: I have the honor to hand you herewith the report of the judges of Class 310, as above,

And remain, sirs, your obedient servant,

Gregory P. Harte, Chairman.

____________

The following exhibits were submitted for examination:

U. S. Exhibit, 537, American Watch Company, Waltham, Mass., U. S. A.—Watches and Chronographs.

British Exhibit, 1,048, Victor Kullberg, London, England—Watches and Chronographs.

British Exhibit, 1,054, Nicole & Nielsen, London, England—Watches, Chronographs, etc.

British Exhibit, 1,060, T. Russell & Sons, London, England—Watches, Chronographs, etc.

British Exhibit, 1,041, Castleberg & Co., London, England—Watches, etc.

British Exhibit, 1,060a, S. Backschmid, Switzerland—Watches.

. . . . . . .

German Exhibit, 36, A. Lange & Sons, Dresden, Germany—Watches, etc.

Swiss Exhibit, L. Audemars, Brassus, Switzerland—Watches, etc.

French Exhibit, 146, A. H. Rodanet, Paris, France—Chronometers.

French Exhibit, 177, G. Tribandeau, Besançon, France—Watches.

Swiss Exhibit, 14a, International Watch Company—Watches.

In presenting the following report, the judges desire to make some explanations, which, we trust, will excuse them in the minds of the impartial for any apparent neglect in the form of their report, and for the limited number of tests made of the horological exhibits.

The judges were appointed too late to do the full amount required, inasmuch as the number of exhibits was so much in excess of any reasonable allotment for examination and report before the closing of the Exhibition.

Commencing their labors, however, immediately after the first call, the examinations were not complete until March 3d, which only permitted a time test to be made of nine days in a single position. This single position was objected to by some of the exhibitors, but ill-advisedly, for the ratings observed in the watches of the objecting exhibitors were of such character as to establish in the minds of the judges the conclusion that their watches would not have made so good a comparative showing if there had been more time to observe the ratings in other positions.

Great care was taken by the individual judges in making up their note books during the examination of the watches, and scrutinizing the inherent and comparative merits of exhibits under the ten different heads unanimously agreed upon, as follows:

It was agreed the judges should use the number 100 as expressing the highest degree of excellence in each of these ten elements of inherent and comparative merit, and adjudge individually to each of the several exhibits such rating as their respective judgments would warrant after careful examination; each set of opinions being made a portion of this report, and in the résumé the mean average being taken as the unanimous verdict of the judges.

It was also decided we should take up each exhibit in the order originally examined, and, beginning with the first element of merit (originality), each judge should in numbers express his judgment of the inherent and comparative merit attaching to each exhibit in this one element; this being done, to proceed with each succeeding element in order and in the same manner. The five judgments being complete and in numbers, the aggregated verdict is arrived at simply by addition and division.

This is not only a verdict as to the inherent and comparative merits of each exhibit, but also a full analysis of each order of merit in any exhibit as compared with all the others. . . .

In giving this verdict it was absolutely necessary to ascertain to the fullest extent the time-keeping qualities of the exhibits. The judges were led to this conclusion from the fact that in some of the exhibits we were shown watches of equal finish containing every known application of horological science in practically the same construction, which should, as far as they could determine by merely optical examination, keep quite as good time as watches of double and treble the costs in other exhibits, thus involving their judgment in doubt upon several elements of merit.

In justice to themselves and to the exhibitors the judges determined to make the test in only one position, and give the whole of the time at their disposal to testing the watches in what might be considered their normal position, if such term is allowable—that is, "pendent up," or hanging.

At the solicitations of the judges Prof. H. C. Russell, Astronomer Royal at the Sydney Observatory, kindly consented to make the tests, and each of the exhibitors was requested to send three watches of his own selection to the Observatory for this trial.

As will be seen by the report of Professor Russell, eight of the ten exhibitors availed themselves of this opportunity. It is proper, however, to state here that none of the exhibitors apparently anticipated this test, and that it is possible some of the watches might have made a better record if they had been differently attended to since the opening of the Exhibition; but they were in this respect all upon a par.

The majority of the watches had been made for exhibition purposes and specially prepared to that end; and some had been previously rated at observatories before sending.

Notably, however, to the contrary of the above, the exhibit of the American Watch Company was the ordinary and regular product of the factory, such as is finished every day.

Notwithstanding the possibility that these exhibits might have been better prepared for observatory time tests, some of the exhibits, as will be seen by the rating, demonstrate the wonderful advances made in the application of horological sciences to the manufacture of watches, and that their rating is being made equal to that of the best marine chronometers.

The following is the report of Professor Russell, and the accompanying diagram (see next page) will readily give an idea of the comparative performance of the different watches.

"Sydney Observatory, 26th February, 1880.

"Gregory P. Harte, Esq.,

"Chairman of the Judges in Horology.

"SIR: I have the honor to report that, in response to your circular, inviting exhibitors of watches each to send three watches to the Observatory to be tested, I received on Monday, February 16th:

"Three watches, Nos. 611, 669, 237, from Mr. Dolman, agent for Mr. Tribandeau, Besançon.

"Three watches, Nos. 987271, 670068, 1221336, from Mr. Manson, agent for Waltham Watch Company.

"Three watches, Nos. 3171, 1935, 2526, from Mr. Allerding, agent for Mr. Kullberg.

"And on the forenoon of February 17th:

"Three watches, Nos. 11527, 19967, 12629, from Mr. Hoffnung, agent for Lange & Sons.

"Three watches, Nos. 1004, 8632, 8370, from Mr. Jacob, as agent for Nicole & Nielsen.

"Three watches, Nos. 70690, 23496, 113516, from Mr. Jacob, as agent for Thomas Russell & Sons.

"One watch, No. 47150, from Mr. Jacob, as agent for Castleberg.

"Three watches, Nos. 12731, 12483, 11680, from Mr. Wiesener, as agent for L. Audemars.

"And on 18th February:

"Two watches, Nos. 2724, 3528, from Mr. Jacob, as agent for Castleberg.

"On the 17th I began rating these watches, keeping them all in one position (hanging), and subject to the same conditions of temperature; in fact, they were all hung on one board, and kept in a compartment locked up so as to avoid change of temperature, except such changes as were due to changes in the weather.

"They were rated once a day by the standard clock, which affords special convenience for this work, and the error of which was found by daily astronomical observations giving the absolute time; great care was taken in rating so as to get the exact error of each watch every day, care being taken at the same time to avoid errors in the seconds dials, a fault sufficiently obvious in some of these exhibits.

"In presenting the result of this test in the form of a diagram (see diagram on the opposite page), it is necessary to explain that the curves show only the change of rate in each case, and nothing is shown here of the actual rate, which was large in several instances.

"In the diagram spaces between faint lines represent seconds; and the thicker faint lines represent the mean rate in each case: When the curve rises it shows that the watch was gaining on its previous rate, and when it falls the watch was losing on its previous rate. For example, in No. 4 curve the thicker line shows the position of a gaining rate of 3 sec. per day; on the 18th, watch No. 4 had a gaining rate of 2.7 sec., and is plotted below the thick line; on the 19th and 20th it was less than 3 sec., but on the 21st the rate increased to 4.8 sec., and the curve rises above the line. The same rule is followed with losing rates; and, therefore, each curve shows whether the watch was gaining or losing on its own rate.

"For convenient reference the barometer and temperature curves are plotted on the same sheet; although from the short time at command the watches could only be tested in one position, a glance at the diagram will show that in some degree at least the temperature adjustment and the isochronal properties of the balance springs were also tested; and I wish to call your attention to the fact that the whole of these show in a more or less degree a marked response to the change in temperature, some being over and others under corrected.

"This fact is important, because it adds another proof that the old form of compensation balance—even when combined with chronometer spring and escapement and all the refinements which the best modern workman can add to it—fails to yield a complete correction for temperature; and I much regret that the American Watch Company, who claim to have overcome this fault by means of a balance involving a new arrangement of the metals, did not send to be tested any of their first-class watches containing this important improvement.

"Several of the rate curves, especially Nos. 4, 10, 13, 16, 21, and 24, respond to the change in the barometer in a way that shows the isochronal properties of their balance springs are not quite perfect. Looking down the curves it becomes at once evident that watch No. 5, which is No. 670068, second grade of the American Watch Company, is remarkably free from these defects, and presents the best rate of all the watches tested. No. 9, which is No. 2526, Kullberg, is the nearest approach to No. 5; indeed, the difference between its highest and lowest rates is 0.1 sec. less than No. 5, but it has not such a steady rate. The timekeeping of both these watches is remarkably good, and shows that we have entered upon a new era in the manufacture of pocket chronometers; for these rates are better than the majority of marine chronometers.

"Among the cheaper watches tested, No. 6, which is No. 1221336, of the American Watch Company, is worthy of notice; it is a watch of the sixth grade, yet its performance has been better than that of many very expensive and otherwise first-class watches among those tested; such a watch speaks volumes in favor of the system under which it was made, and is the best comment upon the accuracy of the machines that produced it.

"There are several watches among those tested which have kept wonderfully steady rates, but their comparative merit is shown in the diagrams much better than it could be by any description. The daily rate of each watch will be found in a table attached.

"The changes in Nos. 1, 2, 3, 17, and 19 were too great to plot.

"H. C. Russell,

"Government Astronomer."

. . . . .