On page 267, line 4, for “straps” read “shafts.”
The author is fully conscious of many shortcomings, which are inevitable in a task of this magnitude, but he believes that something has been done to formulate present knowledge and practice. Any suggestions of improvements or enlargements will be gratefully received, so as to enable future issues to be more valuable and useful.
CHAPTER I.
INTRODUCTORY.
(1) The rapid growth of the cotton trade is in no small degree due to the exertions and ingenuity of the engineers and machinists who have devoted themselves to the subject. It is remarkable how few of the later inventions, at any rate, are those of persons actually engaged in the operations of spinning or weaving. It is quite true that James Smith, of Deauston, forms a conspicuous exception, and that many others could be also named who were at once manufacturers and mechanicians, but the general fact is as stated. To-day, the spinner, who is in a difficulty requiring a mechanical solution, turns the whole matter over to the machinist, who puzzles it out without, in many cases, getting his due reward. It is, however, a general practice for machinists to originate improvements, and the competition in this respect is so keen, that a spinner is never at a loss for a choice of appliances.
(2) In the early part of the century it was no uncommon thing to find textile machines made in a workshop where engines, machine tools, and other forms of machinery were also constructed. For about the last forty years this practice has ceased, and it is now the universal custom to make textile machines only, in any works where they are produced. This practice has led to a subdivision, not only of labour, but of procedure, which enables good results to be attained. The machine of to-day, although not absolutely, is comparatively, cheaper, and is constructed in a way that even thirty years ago would have been deemed impossible. When the author was an apprentice, about twenty years since, the fitting of cotton machinery was a byeword to the engineer and tool maker. To-day, it would be difficult to find more accurate workmanship or sounder construction in any machine of whatever kind.
(3) This is a matter of more importance than might be supposed. The cotton spinning machine making trade in England is a very extensive one, finding employment in Lancashire alone for not less than 25,000 men and boys. This does not include the large number of persons employed in the various businesses which are allied to it, such as spindle and card clothing manufactories. The field for spinning machines is ever enlarging, the possible extent of the cotton industry being enormous. The number of spindles at work in Great Britain exceeds 44,000,000; on the Continent the number is about 23,800,000; in the United States 14,500,000; and in India and Japan it exceeds 3,000,000. These figures, which are approximate only, give a grand total of 85,300,000 spindles, which may all be said to have sprung into being during the present century. Assuming the value of a mill to be equal to 21 shillings per spindle in England, the fixed capital embarked in this branch of the trade alone is £44,220,000. If the very moderate amount of 20 per cent be added to this for working capital, the sum invested in cotton spinning concerns in this country is not less than £53,000,000. The cost per spindle in other countries is much in excess of the amount stated above, being in many cases doubled. In the United States the cost of a fully equipped spinning-mill ranges from 40 to 42 shillings per spindle, and the capital needed for working is also greater than in this country. On the Continent, and in India, the cost per spindle will be less than in America, but the working expenses are also higher than in Great Britain. In thus stating the facts it is impossible to accurately fix the capital employed, but it will probably approach in the aggregate £150,000,000 for spinning mills alone.
(4) The foregoing figures, which are very briefly put, are sufficient to show the magnitude of the industry for which spinning machinists cater. But there is another aspect of the question which is noteworthy, and illustrative of the effect of the work of machine makers. This is the large increase in the productive capacity of the machinery. The production of a self-acting mule in 1835 is given in the following statement, issued by the eminent firm of Sharp, Roberts and Co., and extracted from Dr. Ure’s work on “Cotton Spinning.”
“Statement of the quantity of Yarn produced on Messrs. Sharp, Roberts & Co.’s self-acting mules in twelve working hours, including the usual stoppages connected with spinning, estimated on the average of upwards of 20 mills:—
| No. of hanks per spindle. | ||
|---|---|---|
| No. of yarn. | Twist. | Weft. |
| 16’s | 41⁄2 | 47⁄8 |
| 24’s | 41⁄4 | 45⁄8 |
| 32’s | 4 | 43⁄8 |
| 40’s | 33⁄4 | 41⁄8” |