King Cotton; or, Common sense thoughts on the following subjects, viz

Front matter

O C

0^ s^ A

KING COTTON;

Preface

For the past ten years I have been intending to publish my views on the great value of cotton over silk and linen as a sewing thread. In 1877, I contributed several articles to the " Shoe and Leather Beporter" under the title of Cotton vs. Silk, and should have continued them at greater length but for my determination to publish a book on this and kindred subjects. I have made several beginnings during the past five years in the midst of the daily routine of business cares, but finding it difticult to get ten consecutive minutes in which to write, the matter was deferred until May, 1882, when I yielded to the importunities of the editor of " The Shoe and Leather Manufacturer " of New York, to furnish some articles for his paper. These were copied by foreign journals, notably the ''Boot and Shoe Trades Journal" of London, which raised a formidable opposition in England resulting in a controversy from which I found it impossible to recede. This led to an increased correspondence with parties in various sections, asking for information on these matters which nothing short of a complete file of the papers in question would seem to suftice — finally all the back numbers having been exhausted I was driven to the necessity of compiling this book from my remaining file and in such haste as to render it impossible to properly revise the matter, hence I am compelled to present to the reader an incoherent mass which I had filed simply as memoranda of points to be

1\ PREFACE discussed when a more auspicious time liad arrived. I have this consolation however, that time and events have proven my premises correct ; that what my critics deemed extreme fallacies, have become demonstrated facts, and however incoherently the subjects may be presented, the reader may gather from this book a fund of information which it will be very imprudent to ignore.

Since I began the agitation of this question (in LSI')), over four hundred shoe manufacturers have adopted the system I of seaming shoe uppers, set forth in the following pages. i and the glove manufacturers of this country may be suri prised to learn that the French are now supplying this I market with gloxes the seams of which are too elastic to be

! broken, and stitched with cotton thread which has proven to

j

I be at least six times more durable than silk or linen.

i The more recent agitation of the anti-wax question, and

j sole sewing with cotton, has awakened a wide-spread interj est in the matter of making flexible shoe bottoms, since it j has been demonstrated that more flexible and durable shoes j can be made on the McKay machine than are usually made by hand.

And now that the full fruition of this new and important era in shoe making may be more generally and speedily realized through this feeble instrumentality is the fervent desire

of the

AlTHOli.

Chapter I Cottok Thread Better Than Silk Or Linen For Stitch- Ing Leather

There is nothing of more importance in the make up of a shoe than the thread by which the parts are united, for if the seams give out, the shoes are worthless. It becomes necessary, then, to inquire which of tlie various kinds of thread in use will give the best results, and secondly, how to get it into the shoe with the least possible injury. If any shoe manufacturer supposes that the thread enters the shoe at its pulling strength on the spool, the sooner that he is aroused from such a delusion the better it will be for the credit of his goods.

HOW THREAD IS WORN.

By exact measurement, it is found that the hook of the Wheeler & Wilson machine pulls down 4)^ inches of thread, and any stitcher will bear me out in the assertion that % of an inch is a large average allowance of thread for a single stitch to take up. Now as there are 36 eighths in 4)^ inches, it necessarily follows that the 4>^ inches of thread passes downward 36 times, and the " take-up " jerks it upward 36 times, which altogether makes exactly 72 times that the thread passes through the needle before the stitch is planted in the leather. This being true, is it any wonder that seams fail? But we hear the objector say :

" That can't be true, for the needle goes down but once to form a stitch and the ' take up ' pulls the thread up, which makes it pass through the needle only twice to complete a stitch."

HOW THREAD IS WORN.

We o-rant all that as being true as to the first stitch, but the second stitch has taken the thread tlirough four times, and the third stitch six times, and the fourth stitch eight times, and the fifth stitcli ten times, and so on to the end of the original i}^ inches pulled down to form the first stitch, when the last eighth shall have passed through the needle just 72 times, and from that on to the end of the spool, every identical eighth inch of thread must pass not only through the needle but through the tension and the various thread guides leading to the needle, and last but not least through the leather also ; and tlie wonder is that there is any strength to the thread left. Hence it is that the smoothest and best made needle is by far the cheapest, and the time is prol)ably not far distant when the inquiry, "Who maizes the best needle?" will become general, and the hazardous policy abandoned of adopting the needle that can be had for the least mone3\

Having submitted these matters to Mr. James E. A. Gibbs, of the Willcox & Gibbs Sewing Machine Company, the oldest sewing machine inventor now living, he replied as follows :

"You are quite right in these matters. The fact is, the needle does all the sewing, anyway ; give me a good needle and I will do good sewing, with almost any sewing machine."

Every stitcher will notice that when commencing a seam the stitch looks smooth and satisfactory, but after progressing an inch or two the stitch presents quite a difterent appearance. This is because the thread is but little worn at the start, as above stated, and were it not for bad places made by stopping and starting in again, it would be much better for the shoe to break the thread and start anew at the end of every inch and a half of seam. Now, as the wearing of the thread in sewing (as well as in the finished seam) is so great, it is of vital importance to know vihat kind of thread is the most durable ; in other words, which of all the fibrous substances of which threads are made, will stand the greatest amount of friction. I stated Ave years ago (only to be laughed at) that this fibre was Cotton. I well knew the

PRACTICAL TESTS, AND REASONS WHY COTTON IS BEST. 3

effect likely to be produced by such radical ideas, and did not venture to announce them without having fully tested the truth of the statements made. My investigations at that time had extended over a period of two years or more, and several pairs of shoes had been made and worn out, one of each pair being seamed on a Howe machine with silk (upper and under threads) and the other on a Willcox & Gibbs Automatic Tension machine with a single cotton thread. In each case the shoes stitched with cotton stood the test of wearing out both sole and upper, while those closed with silk failed in from five to ten weeks. The exhibition of these test shoes accompanied by their history as to day and date, etc., led one after another to investigate and make similar tests, until now in this year, 1882, there is scarcely to be found a shoe manufacturer in Essex County, Mass., who would dare risk the old method as against what has proven to be the only true and safe one, viz. : seaming with cotton thread. The use of cotton thread is by no means conlined to Essex County, but has spread throughout the State of Massachusetts, and extended to Maine, New Hampshire, New York, Ohio and Minnesota, and the shoe manufacturers who have adopted the views set forth above are now numbered by hundreds, as ere long they must be by thousands.

One reason of the greater durability of seams made with cotton, lies in the fact that the thread is planted in the shoe comparatively uninjured. The second reason is that the twisted loop-stitch is so elastic that no elasticity of thread is required, although there is more elasticity in cotton than in linen, but not so much as in silk. Of course, these radical ideas did not take root everywhere at once, many being too timid to abandon the old method for the new, but gradually they were compelled to acknowledge that "Cotton was King," and thus it has been that what at lirst was considered absolutely foolish by many, lias been generally — indeed, almost universally — accepted in this section of country ; and it is a remarkable fact that not a single manufacturer can be

ERRORS OF JUDGMENT.

found who, having adopted the new method, has abandoned it for the old or any other way of making durable seams. A stronger confirmation than this, of the truth of these statements concerning the superiority of cotton in seaming, could not well be produced.

The above is but a mere outline or summary of facts which have been developed during the past five or six years. Previous to that time, very little attention was paid to the manufacture of cotton threads for shoe work. About the only cotton then known to the trade was a cheap grade, used and sold as "bobbin cotton," which was also used in making shoe linings. The agitation of this question, however, has been the means of bringing out an article of cotton which is but little (and some makes of thread are not at all) inferior in finish and tensile strength to silk.

Shoe manufacturers will invariably judge of the durability of thread by the number of pounds strain it will bear, and hence they jump at the erroneous conclusion that silk or linen is superior to cotton, while the fact remains that the number of pounds a thread will pull has no more to do with the durability of a seam stitched with it than mathematics has to to do with the growth of a plant. The test of thread in a shoe is the amount of friction it will endure by the constant bending of the seam, as at the ball of the foot in a congress boot, or at the top of the stiffening at the heel and in the crimp in front. It is found that at these points the stitches break ; or in other words, they wear in two by the constantrubbing or friction at every step. This constant bending often causes the leather to break in the wrinkle formed at the ball of the foot on the outside, and it is hardly to be wondered at that the thread will wear in two in less time, although in one of the tests first above mentioned, the break of the leather and one stitch in the wrinkle at the ball was simultaneous.

As to the durability of cotton in comparison with linen, we speak from daily use of the latter in grinding the hooks of

GRINDING TESTS.

our McKay and wax thread machine needles. These hooks are cut before the needles are tempered, and after tempering comes the smoothing process, or the grinding off of the sharp cornets of the tempered steel. To accomplish this, the needle is held in a clamp, as shown in the accompanying sketch,

SHOWING ONE METHOD OF TESTING THREAD.

COTTON AND LINEN and a thread (the size of the one the needle is intended to carry) is saturated with oil and emery, and drawn rapidly back and forth through the liook until the sharp corners are worn off smooth. By the process described, the thread is worn in two very soon, when more is drawn from the spool and again and again it is worn out, and on an average three or four threads are worn out in finishing one needle. We had a cotton thread made of the same size to do this work,

TRUE BASIS OF JUDGMENT.

prepariiiii- it in tlie same way, and fonnd tliat we could flnisli a needle completely with one thread, and yet the thread remain whole, though reduced in size by wear. This reduction in the size of the thread tended to make the hook narrow and V-shaped in the bottom, whereas it should be the reverse. We were forced, in consequence, to abandon the cotton and go back to the linen, because of its brashy nature, which caused it to broom up in wearing and enlarge to three times its original size. This made the linen more valuable for this purpose, although not as durable by at least two-thirds. As an illustration of the superior wearing qualities of cotton over linen, it is hard to conceive of a better test than the above, while at the same time it tends to establish the fact previously stated, that the number of pounds a thread will pull has nothing whatever to do in determining the comparative durability of a seam closed with it.

If I were ottered several brands of linen, I should say that the strongest was the best, and of one cotton thread as compared with another, should conclude^ that the strongest contained the best ({uality of cotton and the longest fibre, and should say the same as to silk; but ])ecause a silk or linen will pull more pounds than a cotton thread, to conclude that it is therefore as much more durable as it is stronger, is extremely fallacious, as any one can easily demonstrate by experiments.

THE PULLING TEST.

Apropos to the foregoing, it may not come amiss to ask and answer a few pertinent inquiries. First, then, what is the use of the pulling test, except to ascertain which of any two or more ))rands of any one kintl of thread — viz. : cotton, silk or linen^is superior?

We answer, none whate>er, since in either kind you have more actual pulling strength than can by any possi])ility be approi)riated by the wearer of the shoe, as a few figures will demonstrate.

FACTS AND FIGURES.

Suppose your silk pnlls 10 pounds, and you put 20 stitches to the inch of your seam. That would s^ive on a congress boot (say 10 inches length of seam) just 2,000 pounds' strength of thread to hold one side of the boot to the other, because you have 10 pounds' pulling strength to each and every stitch. Now, we have before stated that the best cotton thread of to-day will pull very nearly as much as silk. But we will suppose it to be only half as strong ; that would give 1,000 pounds to hold one half the upper to the other, which is at the least six times the strength required. A woman that weighs 175 pounds, bearing her whole weiglit on one foot, does not produce 175 pounds lateral strain on the upper, nor any considerable portion of it, for the reason that the main pressure comes directly on the sole, which is beingpressed hard to the ground, and there is the lateral strain on the sole also. Now, when this downward pressure on the bottom and the lateral strain on the sole is deducted (if the truth of the matter could be accurately figured out), it Avould be found that but a small residue remains to apply to the upper, and that would always be within the limit of endurance of the wearer, as a large majority of people have tender feet, while the soundest feet could not stand twosixths of the pressure the poorest cotton would give.

When an iron stretcher is put into a shoe to enlarge it by stretching it across the ball, the superficial observer could hardly fail of noticing the immense pressure that is produced by the leverage of the screw thus applied. It has often been a matter of surprise that the seam or even the leather could withstand it, though unlike the foot, the stretcher puts at least two-thirds of the strain directly on the upper, as the leather impinges tightly upon the iron, both on the sides and top, tlie bottom only taking its share of the lateral strain minus any downward pressure as given by the wearer of the shoe. This simple matter proves our assertion that the strength of thread in a seam is the number of pounds the thread will pull multiplied by the number of stitches to the

WASTEFUL FOLLY.

inch, and this shonlcl also show the folly of paying the cost of a ten-pound silk (since but so small a fraction of its strength can ever be appropriated), as against the much better as well as cheaper cotton thread, the pulling strength of which is so many times greater than there is any need of.

When manufacturers learn that the most durable thread for either shoes, gloves or clothing is that which will endure the most friction, regardless of its comparative tensile strength, they will have taken a very important step in a pecuniary point of view, and one they will have frequent occasion to regret not having taken much earlier.

Chapter II

HOW TO MAKE A " McKAY SEWED BOTTOM" MORE DURABLE AND FLEXIBLE THAN HAND-MADE.

COTTON THREAD VS. LINEN — WAX USELESS.

In the elucidation of this subject, it becomes necessary, in the first place, to establish the superiority of cotton thread for this purpose, and secondly to show up the uses and abuses of wax, as well as to give good and valid reasons for abandoning it entirely and substituting a much better material ; aiid further, to consider matters incidental to all that goes to make a more flexible and durable shoe bottom. It is a notorious fact that when a shoe is taken from the horn of a McKay machine, it is stiffer than a pegged bottom containing the same number of pegs, as the shoe has stitches, (say three or four to the inch), and it is proposed, further along, to give the reasons why this is so.

First, then, as to cotton thread for shoe bottoms. In the preceding chapter it was shown that a cotton thread would stand three or four times as much chafing in grinding needles as a linen thread of the same size, and it is reasonable to conclude that the same would be true as to the chafing of a stitch in a shoe sole, for this is what wears the thread in two and separates the sole from the upper, and in many cases, before the shoe is half worn out.

THE GOODYEAR TEST.

Some two years ago we furnished Mr. Goodyear (the inventor of the Goodyear welt and turn shoe machines) with some cotton thread with which to make the writer a pair of

A CRUCIAL TEST.

test shoes, according to certain specific directions — the explanation of which seemed to interest Mr. Goodyear, who ordered test shoes, made in like manner, for himself and sons. Becoming restive, however, and impatient for results, Mr. Goodyear concluded to try an experiment. The cotton we furnished was quite too small for shoe bottoms, but as it was the largest we had, and the same size as Barbour's four-cord linen thread, Mr. Goodyear procured some of the latter ; and, holding a piece between the thumb and finger nails of each hand, as shown by the accompanying sketch, commenc-

FiG. 2.

ed to chafe the thread in two by moving his hand rapidly to and fro, and succeeded in parting the last strand at the expiration of fifteen minutes. He then took the cotton thread of the same size, and holding it in the same manner, commenced his labors again. He worked at it until (as he said) his arms ached up to his shoulders, and, finding that he had worked ONE HOUR AND A HALF icUhout breaking a single strand, ceased any further eft'ort in that direction, as the test was not only conclusive, but more' than made good everj^ statement I had made relative to the superiority of cotton.

PERFECT EQUALITY ASSURED. 11

Thinking, however, that perhaps the experiment wliicli has just been described was not exactly equivalent to the conditions and action of the soles of a shoe upon tlie tln^ead, he devised a test which, in effect, would be nearly, if not quite, identical with the wear of tln*ead in a shoe in active service. He prepared two blocks of hard wood with planed surfaces and of equal dimensions, and bored a series of lioles in parallel rows transversely througli both, and tlien sewed linen thread through both from the end to tlie centre of the block, and cotton thread of same size from the centre to the opposite end. He then secured one block in a vise, as shown by the accompanying sketch, and grasping the other with his hand, pushed it back and fortli as far as the stitches would allow. The time was not taken in this experiment, as both threads were being acted upon simultaneously and under precisely the same conditions, although, according to his judgment, he had worked about half an liour, when every

12 THE USELESSNESS OF WAX.

linen thread stitch had worn in two and every cotton thread stitch remained whole. These tests quieted Mr. Goodyear's anxiety as to the results to be obtained from the test shoes then being made. The shoe tests were unequal however, in this, that the linen thread used was Finlayson's best eight-cord, wliile the cotton thread was only the size of Barbour's four-cord McKay thread, and the same needle was used in sewing the small cotton as the large linen thread. The sewing never gave out in either, the slioes both lasting exceedingly well, wearing out the soles and a pair of taps.

Having now furnished the key by which any one interested in the subject can demonstrate the truth of the foregoing statements for himself, relative to the superiority of cotton as compared with linen tliread for shoe bottoms, or, in fact, for anything in the way of seaming, we will pass on to consider the

USE or WAX.

In this, as in very many things, too much is taken for granted, and the subject is allowed to pass unchallenged.

The liabit of wrong thinking upon any given topic (or of no thinking) tends to close all avenues of thouglit in the direction of improvement, and as a result business is done at such a loss that if the same percentage was imposed in the form of a tax by tlie government it would be deemed an insupportable burden which would soon terminate in, armed rebellion.

It is altogetlier probable that no shoe manufacturer ever stopped to consider whether wax was of any real use or not, as it is universally conceded to be indispensable and has been so considered for centuries past. We undertake to say, however, that wax, as used in sole sewing with the McKay machine (for it is that specialty that we are now dealing with), is not only useless, but ahsolntehj detrimental to the shoe. It is that which makes the bottom so stiff and inflexible, and that very stiffness leads the stitcher to pride himself

A merchant's discovery. 13

on the solidity ( ?) of his work. He takes the shoe from the horn, bends it; it feels solid (stiff), and he says "that's business," and we say yes, had business.

If we ask him why he uses wax, he says "to make tlie thread hold, of course."

Now we say that you may pick up an old shoe sewed on the McKay machine, one that has been worn down to the bottom of the channel, to the extent of wearing off the tops of the stitches, and you Mall find the thread as dry and destitute of wax as it v^^as when it left the thread mill. It is but recently that a merchant came to Lynn to see one of our best shoe manufacturers in order to give him a lecture, he having discovered the secret of the ripping of their slioes, as he supposed. He brought substantial proof of his theory in his pocket, which he pulled out and said :

"Now, Mr. B., I came to complain of your shoes ripping and to tell you the reason of it. You seio your shoes without any wax. Here is one of them and you can see for yourself there was never any wax on that thread."

Mr. B. was not a little amused, and he soon satistied his customer that their goods were not only sewed with as much wax as the thread would carry, but that there was much to be learned yet, not dreamed of in his philosophy.

Now, if wax is of any use in a McKay sewed shoe bottom it is " to hold tlie thread" from slipping out after the loops are vjorn off; before that there is certainly no need of any, and if after the stitches are worn off tliere is no wax left on the thread, then we woulcl like to have some one inform us why its use is continued.

It is not until a shoe has been worn some weeks and tlie dry and thirsty sole leather (if we may be allowed the expression) has absorbed all the oil from the wax, leaving the resin to crumble to atoms, that a bottom becomes easy to any considerable degree, and just in proportion as the wax becomes disintegrated, does the bottom become flexible. So

14 WHY WAX IS DETRIMENTAL.

long, however, as the wax remains wax, you ha,ve a more rigid bottom than if pegged or nailed. The reason for this is that the wax sticks the two arms of the loops to each other, and, if they would yield up their elasticity, the thread must move in opposite directions ; it also sticks the loops to the channel, to the leather in the needle hole, and on the surface of the inner sole ; in fact, all around, the thread is fixed innnovable by the wax, and thus the stitches become more rigid than so many rivets, because a rivet would stand by itself independently, while the stitches are like so many rivets tied to each other at both ends as by a strap of metal connecting them. Hence, the rigidity of the McKay sewed bottom, all of which can much better be avoided than continued, as will be shown further on.

We state, without fear of successful contradiction, that wax is an intolera))le nuisance besides being devoid of a single redeeming quality, so far as its use in sole sewing is concerned, and the reasons are, first, that it so clogs the thread as to render it impossible (even with all the tension the thread will endure) to draw in the stitches so as to get the soles together with sufficient firmness to prevent them from working and cutting oft' the stitches directly between them. One reason why this cannot be done is owing to the peculiar formation of the loop-stitch. The stitch being taken, tightening up the stitch next preceding, and the thread having been drawn up and held above the shoe, and at the time completely cut oft' from the heat in the horn, the wax becomes more or less chiTled, and when the hook descends and takes up another loop, all this two or more inches of chilled thread is carrietl down" and completely around the leather between the needle holes by the stitch next in process of formation. This back-handed manner of forming the stitch, or rather, of drawing it in, requires the entire pulling strength of the thread, be it seveuty, eighty, or even a hundred pounds, according to the thickness of the soles ; and even then, notwithstanding the sewing feels stift' and solid, the fact

FOUR MORE REASONS WHY. 15

remains that the stitches are not drawn in sufficiently tight to bring- the soles as snug together as necessary to keep them from working and cutting off the stitches in the manner so commonly seen in McKay sewed work, Wlien the oil of the wax becomes absorbed, and the resin lias crumbled off, leaving the thread dry, you can pull the upper up from the sole and see a space that should not exist, and a slackness of thread, due to the sluggish movement of the thread in drawing in the stitches, and all on account of the wax.

The second objection to wax is that it tends to rot the thread. This fact is so common to all shoemakers who have ever worked on the seat as to hardly need argument to support it. How common it is to see nails full of "waxed ends " in a cobbler's shop, and it is as common to find the strength nearly gone from them after hanging over night. McKay operators have also noticed the rapid deterioration of the thread, especially the outer tiers on the spool, after laying from five to ten hours.

The third objection is the liability of burning the thread in passing it through the vat as well as by the blaze in the horn. Thread is passed through boiling wax, with a .constant blaze under the vat, and nothing whatever to indicate the degrees of heat it is thus subjected to ; and when the thread is transferred to the machine, it is subjected to another burning in the horn by a constant blaze in close proximity to it. These very probable injuries to the thread are incidental to the use of wax, it being necessary not only to keep the wax hot on the thread, but so hot that it will in some degree hold its heat during the time it is held above the shoe and cut off from the heat in the horn. It is impossible, however, to keep the M^ax hot enough.