1803. On Thrajhing Machlnis, 13^ 



Having now fiated that the invention bt-longs to I\Ir Ivleiklc, 

 permit me to examine w^hat is laid by your ccrrcfpondent refpe£l- 

 ing Mr Cotterel's machine, and the ere<l^ion of thraflilng machines 

 m Svi^eden. Thefe are th.e only tv^^o pafFages of his hiflorical 

 ftatement that require to be noticed, the remainder being inap- 

 phcable to the fubjecSl under confideration. 



Your correfpondent fays, ' Mr George Cotterel, iron-founder, 

 Leith Walk, invented one altogether of caiL-mctul, except the 

 frame. I am not certain (he adds), wln.thcr Mr Cotterel or Mr 

 Meikle was the firft inventor of the principles of tliis machine ; 

 but I underfland that Mr Meikle claims the invention in this 

 country. * This is the firlt time, I believe, that ever Mr Meikle 

 and Mr Cotterel were linked together in one paragraph. Indeed, 

 it is wonderful that any perfon, pretending to illuflrate the que- 

 ftion, could make a comparifon -y for, in facSl, the two machines 

 have little more affinity to one another, tlian a brewers dray has 

 to the King's flatc-coach. 



In th^ hrfl place, Mr Cotterel's macliine had no drum ; — this, 

 of itfelf, proves that it was radically dilTerent from IVlr Meikle's. 

 In the fecontl place, it could not bear velocity, as the fkutchers 

 were not fixed ; which proves it was altogether ufelefs. Mr Cot- 

 terel's m.achine was, in faft, a mere toy, fit only for children to 

 play with \ -and though fanftioned by the Board of Truftees at 

 Edinburgh, who moft generoufly gave twenty pounds of the plib« 

 lie money to the inventor, yet was reprobated from the firil by 

 every man in the^ lead acquainted with thd fubje6t. The eredion 

 of it brought difcredit, for many years, upon thrafiiing machines 

 pf all defcriptions ; for people, m4io were ignorant of mechaiiics, 

 naturally enough concluded, when they faw the impcrfe^lnefs of 

 this implement, that machines of every kind were equall)^ defec- 

 tive. I fpeak with certainty, when I fay that the Importation of 

 Mr Cotterel's machine into Norfolk, at an early period, prevented 

 thraflaing machines from getting a footing in that opulent county, 

 till one was ere<fled, betwixt three and four years ago, in the 

 neighbourhood of Lynn, upon the principles of Mr Meikle's in- 

 vention, which has changed the public opinion entirely. It was 

 at the launching of tJiis very machine, that the Duke of Bedford 

 and Mr Coke attended, as mentioned in the account of that re- 

 fpe6lable Nobleman, prefented in page 275. of laft Volume. In 

 a word, Mr Cotterel's machine is laid afide, becaufe it did not an- 

 fwer the object intended ; whereas, Mr Meikle's has fpread far 

 and wide over the whole illand, becaufe experience has proved 

 the wifdom of the principle upon which it is conftrucled. 



I never knew, before I read your correfpondent's letter, that 

 any perfon, diredly or indireftly, gave the merit of inventing the 

 thrailiing machine now in wfe to Mr Cott?re.L That Mr Cot- 

 terel 



