9U
A similar development- is shown by those spinning-mills in whichthe twisting and winding-on of the thread—differently from thomule—is continuously taking place, whether it be by a throstle orby ring spindles. The twisting of the thread is achieved in thiscase by the spindle and dyer traveller respectively running in thesame direction, but with different speeds.
Speed oi' Working
spindles hours
No. M2’s twist. per minute. per week.
1884 .. Throstle .. 4,200 .. (55-70
1891 .. Ring .. .. 9,000 .. 5(5£
Weekly pro-duction (17).
24 hanks40-50 „
This higher capacity of the throstle and ring spindle, which is sovery apparent, is balanced by the greater cost of buildings andincrease of power—therefore, in this respect also 1 , a replacementof labour by capital. Ring-spindles are advantageous up to 40’s.Above these counts they can scarcely supersede the mule, at allevents not in the softer weft yarns (18).
Tho machines used for preparation also show an increase intheir capacity similar to that of the actual spinning-machine. Butthe progress in both is developed not only by the greater produc-tive power of the single machine, but at the same time bv alessening of the number of operatives per machine. This wasmade possible partly by technical progress, partly by raising thelabour capacity. An operative to-day attends to more thantwice, in fact nearly three times, as much machinery as hisfather did. The number of machines in use has become five-foldsince that time—the number of operatives has not- quite doubled(19). Instead of 10,000,000 spindles and 80,000 looms in theyear 1831, England possesses to-day, for cotton alone, about50,000,000 spindles and 600,000 looms. The number of opera-tives lias, on the other hand, only increased from 220,134 (firstofficial census in 1835) to 504,069 (1885). From 1856 to 1885the number of spindles have increased 58.6 per cent., power-looms87.5 per cent., and the number of operatives only 32.8 per cent.
Of especial importance is the decrease in the number of opera-tives in the sjiinniug of fine counts. This process was still in thetime of Ure in a high degree an art which demanded great prae-
17. Ure: “Cotton Manufacture,’’ 11., p. 131. The particulars for thepresent time were received from the spinning-machine makers, Howard andBulloiigh, and Brooks and Doxey.
18. Compare R. Marsden : “ Cotton Spinning” (London , 1888), p. 312.
19. Andrew : “ Fifty Years’ Cotton Trade,” pp. 2, 5.
t