8 
respects very defective. I will not here go into all these 
details* but will point out two defects* either of which were 
sufficient to prevent the successful application of the inven- 
tion. One of these was the arrangement of the apparatus 
for effecting the “ backing-off/ ’ (the difficulties attending 
which movement I have already noticed*) and the manner in 
which the “ sector used by Mr. Eaton for this purpose was 
made to pass into seer with the wheel upon the ” run shaft/’ 
or shaft which turned the spindles, was most objectionable* 
as creating a constant tendency to derangement and breakage 
of both the sector and wheel ; and that this was the result of 
the arrangement I have been informed by a most respectable 
engineer now living in Manchester* and who saw Mr. Eaton’s 
machines during the short time they were in existence. 
Another defect lay in the arrangement for effecting the 
winding of the yarn upon the spindles. For this purpose 
Mr. Eaton employed two conical pulleys, one of which gave 
motion to the other by means of a strap, the latter being 
traversed along the pulleys at intervals so as to vary the 
rapidity of motion of the spindles according to the varying 
size of the cops. It is obvious that in this case the liability 
of the strap to slip upon the pulleys must have led to great 
irregularity in the working of the machine, and in fact I do 
not believe that a large machine could be worked at all on 
such a system. These defects* along with others which 
might be mentioned, led to such trouble and annoyance in 
connection with the attempt to work these machines, that 
they were abandoned after a trial extending over a few 
months. In fact the attempts of Mr. Eaton to construct a 
self-acting mule* as well as those of Mr. De Jongh and of 
Mr. Ewart* to which Mr. Dyer also alludes, can only be 
looked upon as so many experiments * none of which were 
attended with any reasonable amount of practical success ; 
all being abandoned after a fruitless struggle, exhausting the 
