65830 (see fig. 5) covers a mechanism to prevent
overbanking of the balance wheel, primarily of a chronometer escapement.
This, of course, was aimed at making it possible to use the escapement in
connection with a mainspring of greatly varying power. We have seen that
this condition of uneven power existed in the first Hopkins watch. While
the condition was greatly improved in the second model (seen in fig. 4),
it was surely present to some extent, as it is associated with every
spring. Overbanking protection may well have continued to be necessary,
particularly if the gear ratio between escapement and barrel was low
enough to permit hourly rotation of the barrel. The features covered by
this patent were originally submitted as part of what later became patent
165831. Examination of the original manuscript patent file[11] shows
that the patent application was separated into two on the suggestion of
the patent examiner, who pointed out that two distinct and separate
mechanisms were involved, either of which could be used without the
other.

[Illustration: Figure 6.--DRAWING FROM U. S. PATENT 179019 showing
Hopkins' device to prevent the tripping of a chronometer escapement.]

These two patents, which actually started out as one, appear to represent
the watch as it was when Hopkins went to Waterbury, Connecticut, where he
again met Edward A. Locke. They submitted this improved watch model to
the Benedict and Burnham Manufacturing Co., which advised not
manufacturing it until it was further developed. Hopkins went with his
watch from there to Boston, where he conferred with George Merritt who,
like Locke, was interested in getting into the manufacture of a
low-priced watch. Merritt may have been the senior member of the
Locke-Merritt team or may simply have had more faith than his associates
in Hopkins and his watch. At any rate, he advanced expense money while
further efforts at improvement were made.[12] Hopkins' absence from the
_Washington city directory_ of 1877 is perhaps explained by this work he
was doing on his patent. While this was completed to Hopkins'
satisfaction, it still fell short of Merritt's idea of practicality, and
the latter abandoned the idea of manufacturing the watch;[13] what had
started out as a very simple watch of few parts grew, with every effort
to make it workable, more and more complicated by involved and expensive
detail. It appears that Hopkins did not possess the rare gift of
improvemen