“To make my meaning clear, let me revert to the familiar operation of sewing. The hand process is plainly unsuited for mechanical reproduction. How is it to be translated into an equivalent cycle suitable for mechanism? In other words, how is it to be ‘coded’? This case is interesting, inasmuch as we have two independent solutions worked out at different dates and widely different in nature. The earlier invention imitated the hand cycle very closely. The thumb and finger of the right hand in the human being were replaced by pairs of pincers capable of taking hold of the needle and letting it free again, but to avoid having to follow the intricate movements of the human fingers in the operation two pairs of pincers were used, one on each side of the work, which passed the needle backwards and forwards through the fabric one to the other. Following out this idea the needle was pointed at both ends with an eye in the middle, and, as in hand sewing, it carried a moderate length of thread. The pair of pincers which held the threaded needle advanced to the fabric and passed through it to the other pair which took it and retreated so as to draw the thread tight and form the completed stitch. To form the next stitch the work was moved through the proper distance and the same process was gone through, the line of movement of the needle always remaining the same. “There is not much ‘coding’ here. The new cycle imitates the hand-worker so faithfully that it benefits little by the advantages of mechanical action. As in hand work it can only sew with moderate lengths of thread, and must therefore have the needles re-threaded at intervals. Its superiority over hand labor is therefore so slight that it is doubtful whether such a sewing machine could ever have competed with, much less replaced, hand work. But it has one great merit. The needle mechanism is capable of being re-duplicated almost without limit, and the movement of the work which is necessary to direct the stitches for one needle will serve equally well for any number of needles working parallel to it. Hence the machine that would have failed as a sewing machine has survived and proved useful as an embroidery machine. The work is stretched between two rows of pincers and moved by the workman according to the stitches of the pattern. Each stitch is repeated by each of the parallel needles which work side by side at convenient distances, and thus as many copies of the pattern are simultaneously produced as there are needles. Each is a perfect facsimile of all the others, and as each copies faithfully the errors of the workman, this machine is entitled to the proud boast that its productions possess all the defects of hand work--an essential we are told of artistic beauty.