Figure 8. — Remaining Drawings from U. S. 

 Patent 186838, showing the dial gearing used 

 in the Auburndale rotarv. 



f \ \ 1 1 



\^ 4 



"^^^^Wyt^ 



for on January 12. 1876, was in i)rospcct and finally 

 issued as no. 186838 on January 30, 1877, assigned to 

 William B. Fowlc on November 21. 1876.'" This is 

 much the most practical and useful patent in the 

 series. A comparison of these (see figs. 7 and 8) with 

 the Auburndale rotary watch (see fig. 9) shows a 

 remarkable similarity between the inventor's concep- 

 tion and the product eventually manufactured. A 

 practical center arbor to support and guide the entire 



i« Ibid., p. 76. 



Figure g.- .\ibirndai 1; Rotary Watch Movement. 

 (In the author's collection.) 



rotating mechanism is here combined with a stem- 

 winding and le\er-setting mechanism and dial gearing 

 in a well thought out arrangement. 



Here, where the story of the Hopkins w atch diverges 

 from the interests who later brought out the ri\al 

 Waterbury watch, it seems appropriate to call the 

 reader's attention to the basic points of novelty and 

 merit in the Hopkins watch which carried over to 

 what became the Waterbury, somewhat as an 

 hereditary characteristic passes from generation to 

 generation. Previous writers have realized that one 

 of these w-atchcs led to the other and have grouped 

 them together because of the rotating feature which 

 they shared in common. Beyond this point they have 

 treated the watches as though they had nothing in 

 common. .Actually several basic features of the Hop- 

 kins watch existed in both: the long narrow spring in 

 a barrel approximately filling one side of the watch 

 case, a train rotating in the center of the watch and 

 driven by a planetary pinion in mesh with a gear 

 fixed to the stationary part of the watch, a slow beat 

 escapement, and probably the hourly rotation of the 

 train and escapement. When these details appeared 

 in the first watches manufactured for Messrs. Locke 

 and Merritt by the Benedict and Burnham Manu- 

 facturing Co. and later the ^Vaterbury W'atch Co., 

 they were vastly changed in detail and much 

 better adapted to ma.ss production, although still 

 basically the same. 



The story of Hopkins' rotary watch now enters an 

 entirely new setting with new financial backing which, 

 however, had no apparent experience or background 



56 



BULLETIN 218: CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE MISEUM OF HISTORY .\ND TECHNOLOGY 



