136 SECTIONAL ADDRESSES 
be incomplete without reference to the various classes of machinery used 
for purposes of production. Nevertheless the changes which have taken 
place in recent years are so extensive that they can only be indicated here 
in general terms. It would be difficult, without reference to illustrations 
in the records of the time, or to actual exhibits such as those in the Science 
Museum at South Kensington, to convey to the younger generation of 
engineers how elementary was most of the industrial machinery of 1883 
compared with that of to-day—how relatively limited in quantity, capacity 
and range. Yet already the seeds of change had been sown. For several 
decades British ideals in machine construction had been in conflict with 
those which had found their way to this country from abroad. British 
engineers were accustomed to an ample factor of safety, massive design, 
slow-speed operation, and a regard for appearance. On the other hand, 
engineers in foreign countries were undoubtedly more ready to experi- 
ment freely with novel designs, and were responsible for introducing into 
this country what was then known as the ‘ manufacturing principle,’ 
whereby large numbers of standardised articles were produced by repeti- 
tion processes, with the aid of special-purpose machines designed for 
a single operation, thus reducing the necessity for skilled labour. As 
far back as 18541 it is recorded that Joseph Whitworth visited the United 
States and reported favourably on machinery for repetition work. In 
devising machinery of this kind, he reported, ‘ the Americans showed an 
amount of ingenuity, combined with undaunted energy, which we would 
do well to emulate if we meant to hold our present position in the great 
markets of the world.’ About the same time James Nasmyth had visited 
the Colt pistol factory, then newly established in England,? and confessed 
that he had felt humiliated by the experience. He remarked further 
that ‘ The acquaintance with correct principles has been carried out in 
a fearless and masterly manner, and they have been pushed to their fullest 
extent ; and the result is the attainment of perfection such as I have never 
seen before.’* But though British engineers of outstanding ability thus 
gave generous recognition to the lessons which were to be learnt from 
abroad, there was—as Nasmyth himself pointed out—‘ a degree of timidity 
resulting from traditional notions, and attachment to old systems’; and 
this conservatism, no doubt reinforced by relatively lower labour costs, 
still held back the thoroughgoing mechanisation of British industry 
fifty years ago, and indeed for long afterwards. But in the end, with our 
well-known genius for compromise, we have succeeded in combining the 
best features of both types, with the result that British machinery still 
maintains its high prestige in the markets of the world. It is noteworthy 
too that other countries have not hesitated to benefit by the high 
traditions of design and workmanship which have always been upheld by 
British engineers. 
But though the adoption wherever possible of repetition methods, 
involving standardisation and interchangeability of parts, had a marked 
1 New York Industrial Exhibition: Special Reports of Mr. George Wallis 
and Mr. Joseph Whitworth, Parliamentary Papers, 1854, vol. xxxvi. 
2 Colt’s factory established in England, 1851. 
3 Select Committee on Small-Arms, Parliamentary Papers, 1854, vol. xviii. 
