simple. It has been done over and over again.

Since the whole bulk of the under thread must pass through the loop of the
upper one, it, is quite clear that the size of that loop must be
proportioned to the bulk of the shuttle. Thus, a small shuttle would,
perhaps, be covered by an inch of thread, while our supposed mammoth
shuttle might require ten times that amount. Now, let us consider that to
sew an inch of thread into lock stitches frequently involves its being
drawn up and down through both needle and fabric twenty times. This means
considerable chafing, and possible injury to the thread.

But if we were to sanction the use of capacious shuttles, ten inches of
thread must undergo this chafing and seesaw treatment, and under the above
conditions every part of the ten inches must pass up and down two hundred
times--treatment that might reasonably be expected to leave little "life"
in the thread. But in spite of this tremendous drawback, there are machines
offered for sale made with such shuttles.

For reasons that I have now pointed out, it is quite clear that a large
shuttle or bobbin is by no means an unmixed advantage. Indeed, the very
best makers of sewing machines have always striven to keep down the bulk of
the shuttle, and in those splendid machines shown here to-night the use of
the small shuttles is conspicuous. It may be contended that small bobbins
frequently require refilling, which is quite true, but the saving of the
thread effected thereby, not to mention that of the machine itself, amply
compensates for the use of small shuttles. Apart from this, however, it is
no longer necessary to wind bobbins at all. Dewhurst & Sons, of Skipton,
and Clark & Co., of Paisley, have produced ready wound "cops" or bobbins of
thread for placing direct into shuttles. Thus no winding of bobbins is
necessary, and indeed the bobbins themselves are dispensed with. I believe