Page 2 Advertisements Column 3

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2635, 16 September 1882, Page 2

W. II A b r i a, IMPERIAL BOOT DEPOT, CASHEL STREET. For Kid Elastic-Side Boots of good quality, at 7b 6d, try the Imperial For Levant Blaatio-Side Boots, good value, at 8s 6d, go to the Imperial For Kid Button Boots, at 9s, try the Imperial For Kid Laos Oxford Walking Shoes, at 7', call at the Imperial For Kid Oxford Button Shoes, at 7a 6d, go to the Imperial For Children's Kid Lace Oxford Shoes, from 3s 6d, try.the Imperial For French Lasting Boots, from Ss 6d, try the Imperial For Cheap Lawn Tennis Shoos, from 5a 6d, go to the Imperial For Canvas Boating Shoes, at 5s 6d, try the Imperial For the Largest Stock, the Bast Quality, and the Lowest Price In all kinds of Colonialmade Boots, go to W. HARRIS, IMPERIAL BOOT DEPOT, Cashel street. 908 SUITS TO MEASURE FROM 70s. F lIEST CONSIGNMENT of SPRING T STEEPS AND COATINGS Just Arrived, W. M. EGBERTS, Practical Tailor, Manchester street south. Trousers from 18s, Splendid Selection. FOR THE HOLIDAYS. T BT THE CHEAPEST SHOP IN TOWN FOR All kinds of Pipes, meerohaum and wood. Cigar and Cigarette Holders, Knives, Purses, Matchboxes, Razors, Combo, Brushes, Hair Oil, Lime Cream, & &o N.B,—A lot of CRICK STING MATERIAL from last season very cheap. And last, bat not least a HAIR CUTTING SALOON, Whore you can get fixed up for the small sum of BIXZPESiq’GE:. 9495 H. OAKBT, High street NOT QUITE SO DECISIVE AS IT WAS BUT A LITTLE MORE OVERWHELMING. WE CHALLENGE the representative of the Singer Sewing Machine Company, or any of the jnrors on Sewing Machines at the Exhibition who voted for the report coming from that body to controvert the following statement of faots. Messrs Meddings, Ounnlngton, Dale, and Kirk, we call upon you to defend your report. H. O. FIBKB & GO. Chrlstohuroh International Exhibition, June 15th, 1882, REPORT OF COMMITTEE OP EXPERTS. To H. C. Fisks: & Co. DEAR SIB, —In accordance with your request, we have examined the New Davis and the New Singer Sewing Machines, for the pnrpose of comparing them. In oar comparison we have taken Into consideration— 1, Ihe mechanical principle Involved '2. The quality of the material used 3. The degree of workmanship exhibited 4. The facility for doing a good and varied o’asa of work. After taking both machines asunder, carefully examining every piece, and fnlly testing their capabilities, wo have no hesitation in saying that we consider the Davis far the superior machine of the two. Our reasons are as follows: In both machines the same method Is adopted for actuating the needle bar, viz,, a crank with roller working la a cam. This osm in the Davis Machine Is out out of a solid piece of steel and hardened, while in the Singer It 1s not only very mnoh lighter, bat is made of oommon oast bon. The feed apparatus of the two machines are very dissimilar. That of the Singer Is the usual slip feed. The Davis has the vertical feed peculiar to Itself. In this arrangement the presses foot holds the material firmly down till the needle has reached Its lowest point. The pressure Is then relieved and transmitted to the feed bar. Feed bar, needle, and material are then, by a very simple contrivance, moved forward simultaneously the required length of stitch. Motion is given to the shuttle in the Davis machine as follows. An eocentrio at the wheel end of the main spindle gives motion to a vertical lever. This in tnm transmits it through a ball joint of Ingenious construe tion to the only moving part under the machine, a plvotted lever having at its end an adjustable shuttle carrier. In the Singer Machine a pair of mitre wheels drive a vertical spindle, having at Its lower end a crank. A connecting rod from this crank moves a sliding shuttle carrier. It will be seen that in the Davis there are between the main spindle and the shuttle four points of friction, the pivot carrying the vertical lever, the eocentrio, the ball joint, and the pivot of horizontal lever. The two principal move, ments, the eocentrio and the ball joint, are adjustable, and the parts most liable to wear are made of hardened steel. To compass the same work the Singer employs as points of friotlou the teeth of the mitre wheels, the two jonrnsla of vertical spindle, the two ends of the connecting rod, and the sliding shuttle carrier None of these places are adjustable. The small wheels are common cast Iron, having a certain amount of backlash, and consequent tendency to rattle and and break. The connecting rod is a thin bar of Iron, with a hole In each end. The end which runs on the crank pin la one of the principal joints In the machine, having a considerable amount of work to do with small bearing surface, making it very liable to wear, while, as before remarked, there are no means of compensating for any wear. It will be noticed that the shuttle of the Singer Machine 1s carried In a slide, to which a lateral strain is given by the driving rod, causing a certain amount of friction, while In the Davis It Is carried by the lever quite free from friction. With the exception of the small roller working the needle bar, there is not a single piece in the Singer Maohine, not even excepting the shuttle, that cas not be out with an ordinary pookefc knife, and there are no means of adjusting any wearing part. In the Davis not only are most of the pieces made of ateel, and tempered, bat at every essential point means are provided for taking np any wear. On this point we may say that where we had any doubt about the quality of the material employed the the piece was broken and the fracture carefully examined. Having examined the mechanical arrangements of the two machines, we tested their adaptability for work, and we noticed the very peonllar feed of the Davis. In this respect wa have been forced to the conclusion that for all purposes, sewing from the thinnest muslin to even ’ through a metal spoon, the Davis has no parallel for grasp, or for avoiding that puckering often the effect of the pressure on a fare motion feed. We mast in oommon honesty express oar astonishment at the range and variety of work accomplished by the Davis, whioh we are satisfied cannot be done by the Singer. In summarising ear report we repeat that we have no hesitation in saying that we regard the Davis as very superior to the Singer in workmanship, material, and the mechanical principles Involved, and also In performing a greater range of work. We fonnd the Davis to work with equal ease from the lightest to the heaviest fabric. JOHN LEE SOOTT (Scott Bros.), Mechanical Engineer. T. GLUYAB PASOOB, Manager of the Kaiapol Clothing Factory. GEO. P. ANTHONY. Mechanical Expert, from Nettle fold’s, Birmingham, 8300