verted it into cloths to carry their wares to market and sell them on their own account to the dealers: but about 1760, the merchants of Manchester began to employ the weavers, furnishing them with yarn for warp, and with raw cotton, which was spun by the weaver's family for the weft, and paying a fixed price for the labour bestowed in weaving.

The application of machinery to the preparation and spinning of raw cotton for weft preceded by some years the inventions of Arkwright. In the year 1760, or soon after, a carding engine not very different from that now used was contrived by James Hargreaves, an illiterate weaver, residing near Church in Lancashire; and in 1767 the spinning-jenny was invented by the same person. This machine as at first formed contained eight spindles, which were made to revolve by means of bands from a horizontal wheel. Subsequent improvements increased the power of the spinning-jenny to eighty spindles, when the saving of labour which it thus occasioned produced considerable alarm among those persons who had employed the old mode of spinning, and a party of them broke into Hargreaves' house and destroyed his machine. The great advantage of the invention was so apparent, however, that it was soon again brought into use, and nearly superseded the employment of the old spinningwheel, when a second rising took place of the persons whose labour was thus superseded by it. They went through the country destroying wherever they could find them both carding and spinning machines, by which means the manufacture was for a time driven away from Lancashire to Nottingham.

revenue officers to charge them with double the duty paid upon calicoes woven with linen warp and printed for exportation; and also by prohibiting their use at home. With some difficulty an act of parliament was obtained for re moving these obstacles to the develop ment of the manufacture, which from that time was prosecuted with a great and continually accelerated rate of in

The cotton-yarn produced both by the common spinning-wheel and spinningjenny could not be made sufficiently strong to be used as warp, for which purpose linen-yarn was employed. It was not until Arkwright's spinning-frame was brought into successful operation that this disadvantage was overcome. Yarn spun with Hargreaves' jenny continued for some time to be used for weft. At first, the manufacturers of cloths composed of cotton only were subject to much annoyance from the determination of the

crease.

The earliest attempts at producing muslins were made about the year 1780, but without much success, although Indiaspun yarn was substituted as weft for that produced by the spinning-jenny: the greatest degree of fineness to which yarn spun with Arkwright's frame had then been brought, was eighty hanks to the pound, and even this degree was not attainable by means of the jenny. This disadvantage was overcome by the invention of Mr. Samuel Crompton, which came into general use about the year 1786, and which partaking of the nature of both Hargreaves and Arkwright's machines, was aptly called the mule-jenny. By means of this piece of mechanism, yarns were produced of a much greater fineness than had before been attained. Mr. Crompton's invention was made several years before it could be openly used, because of its interference with the patented invention of Arkwright: but when this patent was annulled, the mule-jenny was brought rapidly and extensively into use, so that in 1787, 500,000 pieces of muslin were made at Bolton, Glasgow, and Paisley, with yarn of British production. The price paid at that time by the manufacturers for these fine yarns was 20 guineas per lb; but such have been the improvements since made in the machine and the manner of working it, that yarn of the same fineness has been sold at 14 shillings per lb. Mr. Crompton did not secure to himself the benefit of his invention by taking out a patent; he carried on a spinning and weaving business on a small scale at Bolton, and worked his mule-jenny with his own hands in an attic. In a brief memoir of Crompton, Mr. Kennedy has stated, that about 1802 he, in conjunction with Mr. Lee, set on foot a subscription which

amounted to 500l., and with this Cromp-| ton was enabled to increase his manufacturing establishment, and to set up several looms for fancy work at Bolton. In 1812 he made a survey of all the cotton-manufacturing districts in the kingdom, and ascertained that the number of spindles then at work upon his principle amounted to between four and five millions: since that time the number has been doubled. The kind friends already named assisted him in making an application to parliament for some reward, and the great merit of his invention having been established before a Committee of the House of Commons, he received a grant of 5000l., which was paid to him in full without any deduction for fees or charges. This money was employed by Crompton in putting his sons into business, but they proved unsuccessful, and he was reduced to poverty, when Mr. Kennedy again interfered in his behalf, and raised a second subscription, with the produce of which a life annuity of 637. was purchased. He lived only two years to enjoy this small provision. The first mule-jennies consisted of not more than thirty spindles each, but the number has been progressively increased, and they now frequently contain more than 600 spindles each. With one of these machines, a good workman can produce in a week consisting of sixty-nine working hours, thirty-two pounds of yarn of the fineness of 200 hanks to the pound, and as each hank measures 840 yards, the produce of his week's work if extended in a line would measure 3050 miles. This work, extraordinary as it may seem, does not afford a full conception of the degree of tenuity to which cotton is capable of being reduced, one pound of raw cotton having been converted into 350 hanks, forming a continuous thread 167 miles in length. Mules have been put to work which carry each 1100 spindles. The greatest recent improvement made in the construction of this machine has been effected by Messrs. Sharp, Roberts, and Co., machinists, of Manchester. These machines, which are called self-acting mules, do not require the manual aid of a spinner, the only attendance necessary being that of children, called piecers,

who join such threads as may be accidently broken. Self-acting mules were contrived at different times by Mr. William Strutt of Derby, Mr. Kelly of Lanark, Mr. De Jongh of Warrington, and others; but none of these were brought successfully into use, owing no doubt in some measure to the inferior skill of the machine-makers as compared with the perfection which they have since attained.

The first successful attempt to weave by means of machinery was made in 1785 by Dr. Cartwright, who secured the invention by patent. In a commercial point of view Dr. Cartwright did not draw any advantage from his power-loom; but in 1809 he obtained from parliament a grant of 10,000l. as a reward for his ingenuity. Mr. Monteith, of Pollokshaws, Glasgow, who fitted up 200 power-looms in 1801, was the first person who brought them to profitable use. A great obstacle to their success was presented by the necessity for the frequent stopping of the machine in order to dress the warp. This difficulty was removed in 1804 by the invention of a machine for dressing the whole of the warp before it is placed in the loom, which was made the subject of a patent by Mr. Radcliffe, the inventor. In the use of this machine the warp in its progress to the weaving beam is passed through a dressing of hot starch; it is then compressed between rollers to free it from the superfluous quantity of starch taken up, and is afterwards, in order to dry it, drawn over a succession of cylinders heated by passing steam through them; during this last part of the operation the warp is "lightly brushed as it moves along, and is fanned by rapidly revolving fanners." The flour used for this dressing operation throughout the cotton factories of this kingdom amounts in the year to at least 650,000 bushels. The number of power-looms used in cotton factories throughout the kingdom at the end of the year 1835 was stated by the inspectors of factories in a return laid before parliament to be 109,626. The number in England was 90,679; Scot land, 17,531; Ireland 1416. In Lancashire the number of spindles was 61,176; Cheshire, 22,491; Lanarkshire, 14,069.

Each of these looms, if of good construction and attended by a skilful weaver, was capable of producing 120 yards of cloth per week, or 6240 yards in the year, at which rate the annual productive power of the whole number of looms amounted to 684 millions of yards.

Hitherto it has not been practicable to produce any but coarse or heavy goods by means of the power-loom; fine calicoes, muslins, and fancy goods are woven by the hand. The number of hand-loom weavers cannot be ascertained with the same correctness as the number of powerlooms, the latter being collected together in factories which are under the superintendence of official inspectors, while hand-loom weaving is altogether a domestic manufacture carried on in the cottages of the artisans. Computations of the number of these domestic looms have been made by different intelligent persons conversant with the trade, who have estimated them variously; the lowest at 200,000 and the highest at 250,000.

Mr. Kennedy, who is considered a good authority on this subject, supposed the value of cotton goods made in Great Britain in 1832, when the quantity of the raw material used was about 12 per cent. less than in 1833, was 24,760,000l. Mr. Baines, who has taken great pains to test the accuracy of his calculations in every possible way, has made the value amount, in 1833, to 31,338,6931. Of this value the part exported amounted to 18,459,000l., and the value of the goods remaining for home consumption would therefore be 12,879,6931. (Hist. of Cotton Manufacture, p. 412.) Following Mr. Baines's mode of calculation, Mr. Porter estimated the value of the cotton goods manufactured in 1841 at 48,641,343l.; and as the exports, including yarn, amounted to 24,668,6187., there would remain for home consumption goods to the value of 23,972,7251. The capital invested in the cotton manufacture in Great Britain is variously estimated at from 30,000,000l. to 34,000,000l.; and Mr. Baines regards the latter estimate as very moderate.

heads Hose and Lace, which are branches of the Cotton Manufacture, and also a proportionate number of those who were returned as weavers, spinners, and factory workers (fabric not specified'), and we have then a total of nearly half a million persons engaged in this great branch of national industry, and this at a time when it was in a very depressed state.

Persons Employed. 377,662

50,955

35,347

The number of persons returned under the head Cotton Manufacture in the Census Returns of 1841 is 302,376, to which should be added those returned under the

Cotton Hose

Lace

·

Females aged 20 and upwards. under 30

138,112

59,171 104,470 75,909

The employment of young persons in cotton factories is regulated by statute. [FACTORIES ACT.]

The first cotton-mill built in the United States was set to work in Rhode Island in 1790, and about the same time one was erected at Beverley, Massachusetts, by an incorporated company. The manufacture made at first so little progress in the United States, that up to 1808 not more than 15 spinning-mills had been erceted. There was a great increase in 1812, occasioned by the war between England and America; again from 1820 to 1825 much capital was applied to this object; also in 1831 and 1832; and still more since the passing of the tariff of 1842, which imposed higher import duties on cotton and other manufactured goods generally.

In 1840 the number of cotton manufactories in the United States was 1240, which employed 2,284,631 spindles, and produced manufactured articles valued at 46,350,000 dollars. The capital invested was estimated at 51,000,000 dollars; and the number of persons employed, including dyers, printers, &c., was 72,119. The value of goods produced in Massachusetts in 1840 was 16,553,000 dollars; Rhode Island 7,116,000; Pennsylvania, 5,013,000; New Hampshire, 4,142,000, New York, 3,640,000; Connecticut,