community from a series of inventions in only one of the mechanic arts during a short term of years.

Putting the calculation for this country in another light makes the result more striking than mere figures.

In 1870 there were less than seven million spindles in the country, not more than half of them on warp.

The saving effected by the new forms of spindle since that date has thus been more than all the warp spinning machinery then in the country, with the power required to drive it, the labor required to run it, and all the incidental expenses connected with it. This seems enormous, but it is nevertheless true. From this, also, it is easy to deduce another fact of interest to cotton manufacturers, that to-day more than three times as much warp yarn is spun in the country as in 1870, a rate of increase without parallel since the earliest introduction of the cotton manufacture.

-

In closing, I take the liberty of pointing a moral or two deduced from the facts and figures before given.

But for the patent system of the United States, the advantages derived from these inventions would probably never have been realized.

The Rabbeth idea was developed under the pressure of patent litigation, and but for that it would never have been born.

More than this, if either the Sawyer or Rabbeth idea had been furnished gratis to any single cotton manufacturer, the gain in his establishment alone would not have warranted him in expending the large sums which were required to develop and perfect the structures. If given to a machine builder, he could not have afforded to expend these sums in the hopes of obtaining only a manufacturer's profit, in competition with any other builders who saw fit to copy his work.

This would apply to all improvements requiring a large amount of time and money to perfect them. Business men would not and could not give this time or spend this money, if, when the desired result was accomplished, no personal advantage could be secured thereby.

Another reflection seems pertinent: Bills have several times been brought before Congress to abolish all duties on cotton machinery, on the ground that it is a "raw material" of the cotton manufacturers, and that a lower cost for machinery would encourage the building of more cotton mills..

I presume there would be no question here, that, if cotton goods are entitled to tariff protection, machinery is also; but these inventions furnish such an illustration of the public value of home industries that I feel warranted in calling your attention to them in this connection.

The Sawyer spindle was invented by an American, and was perfected in an American machine shop. The same is true of the Rabbeth spindle, and the inventor was a mechanic employed in an American shop, engaged in building cotton machinery. The improvement was made upon a machine, the ring frame, that was in 1870 hardly known in England, ́and so far as known there it was unpopular, because English builders had not learned to build it properly.

Had there been no shops here making cotton machinery, it is very probable that our spinners generally would be using flyer frames to-day, and that not only the Sawyer and Rabbeth spindles, but the ring frame itself, would be still practically unknown among us.

Supposing, however, that the ordinary ring frame was in use here, and that all cotton machinery was imported without payment of duty, and that the extent of the cotton manufacture remained the same as now (which it would not); the saving made by American inventions in this single machine would exceed the whole amount of duties that would have been paid on all kinds of cotton machinery. Our number of spindles has increased about 8,000,000 in twenty years. The cost in England of carding, spinning and weaving machinery, all included, on average counts is said not to exceed one pound or five dollars per spindle. This would mean an importation of $40,000,000 worth of machinery, English price. At 45 per cent., the present rate, the duty would be $18,000,000,- all the saving that

could have been made by free trade in all kinds of cotton machinery, if all were imported; while American invention, on only one of the many different machines required, has saved the country three times as much.

Besides this, we have had the advantages of protection ; diversified industry, employment at good wages, increased market for other productions, and so on.

By following out this line of thought, and making fair investigation, I believe it would be found that American inventions in protected industries, made possible by their existence here, have been worth far more to the country than all the saving that could have been made in the cost of the articles under absolute free trade.

This, however, is a spindle rather than a tariff essay, and I hope that you have found sufficient practical advantage from it to repay you for your kind attention.

At the conclusion of the reading of the paper, General Draper continued:

Gentlemen, I want to detain you long enough to read a letter which was received since this paper was written. It came without solicitation. In preparing a new book which we are about publishing, an advertising book, my son wrote to Mr. F. P. SHELDON of Providence, R. I., asking for estimates of power, etc., and he sent them up, and also sent this letter.

GEORGE DRAPER & SONS.

PROVIDENCE, R. I., April 3, 1891.

DEAR SIRS: In connection with the figures on Print mill, it occurred to me that you might be interested in the matter of power, as this item has increased so extremely since the days of Sawyer, warp and mule filling. I have made calculations based on above style of mill, and the modern high-speed Rabbeth, and all frames, and find that the product per horse-power is about the same in both, i. e., the increased product from high speed just balances the increased power. (This is comparing with the best mules, high speed.) Of course, figures can be found in different mills, where

the speeds are either up or down a little, that would vary the above result, but for an average it is as near right as can be fixed

upon.

The question of power has sometimes been raised, on account of the "new speeds," whether it does not take more power to produce a pound of yarn now, than with the moderate speeds of Sawyer and mule filling. It does not. The result is about the same in comparing a mill with Rabbeth high-speed warp, and best highspeed mule filling, with all frames. In other words, the question of power per pound of product seems to be practically without weight in any comparisons of this sort; and this leaves the comparative merits to be settled on other points: cost of labor, floor space, machinery, etc. Yours truly,

F. P. SHELDON.

The committee on nominations reported the following nominations for officers of the Association for the ensuing year, and, on motion, the Secretary cast the ballot of the Association for the nominees, who were thereupon declared elected:

President, WALTER E. PARKER of Lawrence, Mass.

Vice-Presidents, ROBERT MCARTHUR of Biddeford, Me.; SIMEON B. CHASE of Fall River, Mass.

Directors, E. W. THOMAS of Lowell, Mass.; WILLIAM H. WHITIN of Whitinsville, Mass.; ROBERT R. SMITH of New Hartford, Conn.; ALFRED M. GOODALE of Waltham, Mass.; WILLIAM J. KENT of New Bedford, Mass.; and HERMAN F. STRAW of Manchester, N. H.

The Secretary here read the following nominations for membership in the Association; the several gentlemen being recommended by the Board of Government for election:

Messrs. SAMUEL HALE, South Berwick, Me.; JOHN K. Russell, Grosvenor Dale, Conn.; EDWIN N. BARTLETT, North Oxford, Mass.; FREDERICK A. FLATHER, Newton Upper Falls, Mass.,

who were thereupon elected members of the Association.

The PRESIDENT. Discussion of the paper by Mr. Draper is now in order.

When

Mr. ATKINSON. Mr. President and Gentlemen: the Columbian Exposition was first proposed I ventured to make a suggestion to those who were the managers in New York, since transferred to Chicago, that it should be made an exhibition of the development of industry. I held to the theory then, now fully sustained, that whatever had been at any time in the history of the world, exists now, somewhere. I knew that by going to Patagonia and Alaska, one would discover flint implements still in use, corresponding to those used by the mound builders, that might be placed upon exhibition. I did not feel sure that the distaff would be found anywhere. I have since found it in use in different parts of the world. The first was in Mexico, and through the kindness of the late Mr. Wade I sent down to Mexico and procured this picture of the art of spinning with the distaff and weaving without a loom, as it is even now practised among the people of that country. I also procured from Greece this little picture, which I handed to General Draper to copy in his treatise. I have sent to Peru and to Pompeii, where the distaff is still used by the spinster. Singularly enough this led to the discovery of a curious type of art which one would hardly have thought to find in a country like Mexico, but there came up, by the kindness of the gentleman by whom my message was sent, a set of typical figures which I think are among the most extraordinary illustrations of an art that I have ever seen. They are not very fragile; they are rag dolls, and they represent the Mexican peon spinning cotton upon the distaff; the daughter combing her hair; and the old gentleman reading what is apparently an advertisement of a quack medicine.

I thought it would be of interest to you to see these photographs taken from the little figures; and then I thought it would be interesting to you and others to see some of the actual product of the distaff, and I sent again to Mexico and procured the wool which they are now using. You will