_Group_--_Scientific and Philosophical Instruments and Methods._
Class 310.--Chronometric Apparatus, Chronometers, Astronomical Clocks,
Watches, Chronographs, etc., etc.
_Judges_.--John McGarvie Smith, New South Wales.
P. E. Bound, Switzerland.
H. C. Russell, B.A., F.R.A.S., Great Britain.
E. Beckmann, Germany.
Gregory P. Harte, United States.
_To the Honorable Committee on Judging and Awards, Sydney
International Exhibition._
GENTLEMEN: I have the honor to hand you herewith the report of the
judges of Class 310, as above,
And remain, sirs, your obedient servant,
GREGORY P. HARTE, Chairman.
* * * * *
The following exhibits were submitted for examination:
U. S. Exhibit, 537, American Watch Company, Waltham, Mass., U. S.
A.--Watches and Chronographs.
British Exhibit, 1,048, Victor Kullberg, London, England--Watches and
Chronographs.
British Exhibit, 1,054, Nicole & Nielsen, London, England--Watches,
Chronographs, etc.
British Exhibit, 1,060, T. Russell & Sons, London, England--Watches,
Chronographs, etc.
British Exhibit, 1,041, Castleberg & Co., London, England--Watches,
etc.
British Exhibit, 1,060a, S. Backschmid, Switzerland--Watches.
* * * * *
German Exhibit, 36, A. Lange & Sons, Dresden, Germany--Watches, etc.
Swiss Exhibit, L. Audemars, Brassus, Switzerland--Watches, etc.
French Exhibit, 146, A. H. Rodanet, Paris, France--Chronometers.
French Exhibit, 177, G. Tribandeau, Besancon, France--Watches.
Swiss Exhibit, 14a, International Watch Company--Watches.
In presenting the following report, the judges desire to make some
explanations, which, we trust, will excuse them in the minds of the
impartial for any apparent neglect in the form of their report, and
for the limited number of tests made of the horological exhibits.
The judges were appointed too late to do the full amount required,
inasmuch as the number of exhibits was so much in excess of any
reasonable allotment for examination and report before the closing of
the Exhibition.
Commencing their labors, however, immediately after the first
call, the examinations were not complete until March 3d, which only
permitted a time test to be made of nine days in a single position.
This single position was objected to by some of the exhibitors,
but ill-advisedly, for the ratings observed in the watches of the
objecting exhibitors were of such character as to establish in the
minds of the judges the conclusion that their watches would not have
made so good a comparative showing if there had been more time to
observe the ratings in other positions.
Great care was taken by the individual judges in making up their note
books during the examination of the watches, and scrutinizing the
inherent and comparative merits of exhibits under the ten different
heads unanimously agreed upon, as follows:
1. Originality.
2. Invention and discovery.
3. Utility and quality of material.
4. Skill in workmanship.
5. Fitness for purposes intended.
6. Adaptation to public wants.
7. Economy.
8. Cost.
9. Finish and elegance of cases.
10. Time-keeping qualities.
It was agreed the judges should use the number 100 as expressing the
highest degree of excellence in each of these ten elements of inherent
and comparative merit, and adjudge individually to each of the several
exhibits such rating as their respective judgments would warrant after
careful examination; each set of opinions being made a portion of
this report, and in the _resume_ the mean average being taken as the
unanimous verdict of the judges.
It was also decided we should take up each exhibit in the order
originally examined, and, beginning with the first element of merit
(originality), each judge should in numbers express his judgment of
the inherent and comparative merit attaching to each exhibit in this
one element; this being done, to proceed with each succeeding element
in order and in the same manner. The five judgments being complete and
in numbers, the aggregated verdict is arrived at simply by addition
and division.
This is not only a verdict as to the inherent and comparative merits
of each exhibit, but also a full analysis of each order of merit in
any exhibit as compared with all the others....
In giving this verdict it was absolutely necessary to ascertain to the
fullest extent the time-keeping qualities of the exhibits. The judges
were led to this conclusion from the fact that in some of the
exhibits we were shown watches of equal finish containing every
known application of horological science in practically the same
construction, which should, as far as they could determine by merely
optical examination, keep quite as good time as watches of double and
treble the costs in other exhibits, thus involving their judgment in
doubt upon several elements of merit.
In justice to themselves and to the exhibitors the judges determined
to make the test in only one position, and give the whole of the time
at their disposal to testing the watches in what might be considered
their normal position, if such term is allowable--that is, "pendent
up," or hanging.
At the solicitations of the judges Prof. H. C. Russell, Astronomer
Royal at the Sydney Observatory, kindly consented to make the tests,
and each of the exhibitors was requested to send three watches of his
own selection to the Observatory for this trial.
As will be seen by the report of Professor Russell, eight of the
ten exhibitors availed themselves of this opportunity. It is proper,
however, to state here that none of the exhibitors apparently
anticipated this test, and that it is possible some of the watches
might have made a better record if they had been differently attended
to since the opening of the Exhibition; but they were in this respect
all upon a par.
The majority of the watches had been made for exhibition purposes and
specially prepared to that end; and some had been previously rated at
observatories before sending.
_Notably, however, to the contrary of the above, the exhibit of the
American Watch Company was the ordinary and regular product of the
factory, such as is finished every day._
Notwithstanding the possibility that these exhibits might have been
better prepared for observatory time tests, some of the exhibits, as
will be seen by the rating, demonstrate the wonderful advances made in
the application of horological sciences to the manufacture of watches,
and that their rating is being made equal to that of the best marine
chronometers.
The following is the report of Professor Russell, and the accompanying
diagram (see next page) will readily give an idea of the comparative
performance of the different watches.
"_Sydney Observatory, 26th February, 1880_.
"GREGORY P. HARTE, ESQ.,
"_Chairman of the Judges in Horology_.
"SIR: I have the honor to report that, in response to your circular,
inviting exhibitors of watches each to send three watches to the
Observatory to be tested, I received on Monday, February 16th:
"Three watches, Nos. 611, 669, 237, from Mr. Dolman, agent for Mr.
Tribandeau, Besancon.
"Three watches, Nos. 987271, 670068, 1221336, from Mr. Manson, agent
for Waltham Watch Company.
"Three watches, Nos. 3171, 1935, 2526, from Mr. Allerding, agent for
Mr. Kullberg.
"And on the forenoon of February 17th:
"Three watches, Nos. 11527, 19967, 12629, from Mr. Hoffnung, agent for
Lange & Sons.
"Three watches, Nos. 1004, 8632, 8370, from Mr. Jacob, as agent for
Nicole & Nielsen.
"Three watches, Nos. 70690, 23496, 113516, from Mr. Jacob, as agent
for Thomas Russell & Sons.
"One watch, No. 47150, from Mr. Jacob, as agent for Castleberg.
"Three watches, Nos. 12731, 12483, 11680, from Mr. Wiesener, as agent
for L. Audemars.
"And on 18th February:
"Two watches, Nos. 2724, 3528, from Mr. Jacob, as agent for
Castleberg.
"On the 17th I began rating these watches, keeping them all in one
position (hanging), and subject to the same conditions of temperature;
in fact, they were all hung on one board, and kept in a compartment
locked up so as to avoid change of temperature, except such changes as
were due to changes in the weather.
"They were rated once a day by the standard clock, which affords
special convenience for this work, and the error of which was found by
daily astronomical observations giving the absolute time; great care
was taken in rating so as to get the exact error of each watch every
day, care being taken at the same time to avoid errors in the seconds
dials, a fault sufficiently obvious in some of these exhibits.
"In presenting the result of this test in the form of a diagram (see
diagram on the opposite page), it is necessary to explain that the
curves show only the change of rate in each case, and nothing is shown
here of the actual rate, which was large in several instances.
"In the diagram spaces between faint lines represent seconds; and the
thicker faint lines represent the mean rate in each case: When the
curve rises it shows that the watch was gaining on its previous rate,
and when it falls the watch was losing on its previous rate. For
example, in No. 4 curve the thicker line shows the position of a
gaining rate of 3 sec. per day; on the 18th, watch No. 4 had a gaining
rate of 2.7 sec., and is plotted below the thick line; on the 19th and
20th it was less than 3 sec., but on the 21st the rate increased
to 4.8 sec., and the curve rises above the line. The same rule is
followed with losing rates; and, therefore, each curve shows whether
the watch was gaining or losing on its own rate.
"For convenient reference the barometer and temperature curves are
plotted on the same sheet; although from the short time at command the
watches could only be tested in one position, a glance at the diagram
will show that in some degree at least the temperature adjustment and
the isochronal properties of the balance springs were also tested; and
I wish to call your attention to the fact that the whole of these
show in a more or less degree a marked response to the change in
temperature, some being over and others under corrected.
"This fact is important, because it adds another proof that the old
form of compensation balance--even when combined with chronometer
spring and escapement and all the refinements which the best modern
workman can add to it--fails to yield a complete correction for
temperature; and I much regret that the American Watch Company, who
claim to have overcome this fault by means of a balance involving a
new arrangement of the metals, did not send to be tested any of their
first-class watches containing this important improvement.
"Several of the rate curves, especially Nos. 4, 10, 13, 16, 21, and
24, respond to the change in the barometer in a way that shows the
isochronal properties of their balance springs are not quite perfect.
_Looking down the curves it becomes at once evident that watch No. 5,
which is No. 670068, second grade of the American Watch Company, is
remarkably free from these defects, and presents the best rate of
all the watches tested._ No. 9, which is No. 2526, Kullberg, is the
nearest approach to No. 5; indeed, the difference between its highest
and lowest rates is 0.1 sec. less than No. 5, but it has not such a
steady rate. The timekeeping of both these watches is remarkably good,
and shows that we have entered upon a new era in the manufacture of
pocket chronometers; _for these rates are better than the majority of
marine chronometers._
"_Among the cheaper watches tested, No. 6, which is No. 1221336, of
the American Watch Company, is worthy of notice; it is a watch of the
sixth grade, yet its performance has been better than that of many
very expensive and otherwise first-class watches among those tested;
such a watch speaks volumes in favor of the system under which it was
made, and is the best comment upon the accuracy of the machines that
produced it._
"There are several watches among those tested which have kept
wonderfully steady rates, but their comparative merit is shown in the
diagrams much better than it could be by any description. The daily
rate of each watch will be found in a table attached.
"The changes in Nos. 1, 2, 3, 17, and 19 were too great to plot.
"H. C. RUSSELL,
"_Government Astronomer._"
* * * * *