Historic knitting machine back on display
The machine behind the man credited with helping start the Industrial Revolution returns to a Derbyshire town.
The Framework Knitting Machine, invented in 1589, made socks and stockings but they had to be tied up with a garter to stop them falling down.
Almost 200 years later, Jedediah Strutt, the founding father of the Belper Mills, developed an attachment to the machine to solve the problem and produce ribbed socks and stockings.
The machine, which was once on display at North Mill Museum before it closed in 2022, is now on show at Belper Library.
Derbyshire-born Strutt later helped to create the world's first factories - cotton mills - at Cromford with Richard Arkwright in 1771 and then in Belper along the River Derwent in 1776.
In 2014, a blue plaque commemorating Strutt was unveiled at Friar Gate House, his final home.
Ian Hill, chair of Belper North Mill Trust, said the machine, which had been in storage since the museum closed, was "unique".
He said the trust and the Volunteers Association were "delighted to be able to bring home this important piece of Belper's history".
"Without this invention, who knows how Belper would have developed," he added.
Mr Hill thanked the Belper Library Team, Belper Historical Society, Belper Town Council and Derbyshire County Council for their support.
Follow BBC Derby on Facebook, on X, or on Instagram. Send your story ideas to eastmidsnews@bbc.co.uk or via WhatsApp on 0808 100 2210.
Plan in works to save globally important mills
Fears plan for crumbling mills will be 'unviable'
North Mill Belper
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Real risk Rachel Reeves's spending review will be about the departments that have lost out
"It's a big deal for this government," says Simon Case. "It's the clearest indication yet of what they plan to do between now and the general election, a translation of their manifesto. "This is where you should expect the chancellor to say, on behalf of the government: 'This is what we're about'." As the former cabinet secretary, Mr Case was the man in charge of the civil service during the last spending review, in 2021. On Wednesday, Rachel Reeves will unveil the Labour government's priorities for the next three years. But it's unclear whether it will provide all that much of an answer about what it's really about. Unlike the Autumn budget, when the chancellor announced her plans on where to tax and borrow to fund overall levels of spending, the spending review will set out exactly how that money is divided up between the different government departments. Since the start of the process in December those departments have been bidding for their share of the cash - setting out their proposed budgets in a negotiation which looks set to continue right up to the wire. This review is being conducted in an usual level of detail, with every single line of spending assessed, according to the chancellor, on whether it represents value for money and meets the government's priorities. Budget proposals have been scrutinised by so called "challenge panels" of independent experts. It's clear that health and defence will be winners in this process given pre-existing commitments to prioritise the NHS - with a boost of up to £30bn expected - and to increase defence spending. On Sunday morning, the government press release trumpeted an impressive-sounding "£86bn boost" to research and development (R&D), with the Science and Technology Secretary Peter Kyle sent out on the morning media round to celebrate as record levels of investment. We're told this increased spending on the life sciences, advanced manufacturing and defence will lead to jobs and growth across the country, with every £1 in investment set to lead to a £7 economic return. But the headline figure is misleading. . That £86bn has been calculated by adding together all R&D investment across government for the next three years, which will reach an annual figure of £22.5bn by 2029-30. The figure for this year was already set to be £20.4bn; so while it's a definite uplift, much of that money was already allocated. Read More: Peter Kyle also highlighted plans for "the most we've ever spent per pupil in our school system". I understand the schools budget is to be boosted by £4.5bn. Again, this is clearly an uplift - but over a three-year period, that equates to just £1.5bn a year (compared with an existing budget of £63.7bn). It also has to cover the cost of , and the promised uplift in teachers' pay. In any process of prioritisation there are losers as well as winners. We already know about planned cuts to the Department of Work and Pensions - but other unprotected departments like the Home Office and the Department of Communities and Local Government are braced for a real spending squeeze. We've heard dire warnings about austerity 2.0, and the impact that would have on the government's crime and policing priorities, its promises around housing and immigration, and on the budgets for cash-strapped local councils. The chancellor wants to make it clear to the markets she's sticking to her fiscal rules on balancing the books for day-to-day the decision to loosen the rules around borrowing to fund capital investment have given her greater room to manoeuvre in funding long-term infrastructure projects. That's why we've seen her travelling around the country this week to promote the £15.6bn she's spending on regional transport projects. The Treasury team clearly wants to focus on promoting the generosity of these kind of investments, and we'll hear more in the coming days. But there's a real risk the story of this spending review will be about the departments which have lost out - and the promises which could slip as a result.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Real risk Rachel Reeves's spending review will be about the departments that have lost out
"It's a big deal for this government," says Simon Case. "It's the clearest indication yet of what they plan to do between now and the general election, a translation of their manifesto. "This is where you should expect the chancellor to say, on behalf of the government: 'This is what we're about'." As the former cabinet secretary, Mr Case was the man in charge of the civil service during the last spending review, in 2021. On Wednesday, Rachel Reeves will unveil the Labour government's priorities for the next three years. But it's unclear whether it will provide all that much of an answer about what it's really about. Unlike the Autumn budget, when the chancellor announced her plans on where to tax and borrow to fund overall levels of spending, the spending review will set out exactly how that money is divided up between the different government departments. Since the start of the process in December those departments have been bidding for their share of the cash - setting out their proposed budgets in a negotiation which looks set to continue right up to the wire. This review is being conducted in an usual level of detail, with every single line of spending assessed, according to the chancellor, on whether it represents value for money and meets the government's priorities. Budget proposals have been scrutinised by so called "challenge panels" of independent experts. It's clear that health and defence will be winners in this process given pre-existing commitments to prioritise the NHS - with a boost of up to £30bn expected - and to increase defence spending. On Sunday morning, the government press release trumpeted an impressive-sounding "£86bn boost" to research and development (R&D), with the Science and Technology Secretary Peter Kyle sent out on the morning media round to celebrate as record levels of investment. We're told this increased spending on the life sciences, advanced manufacturing and defence will lead to jobs and growth across the country, with every £1 in investment set to lead to a £7 economic return. But the headline figure is misleading. . That £86bn has been calculated by adding together all R&D investment across government for the next three years, which will reach an annual figure of £22.5bn by 2029-30. The figure for this year was already set to be £20.4bn; so while it's a definite uplift, much of that money was already allocated. Read More: Peter Kyle also highlighted plans for "the most we've ever spent per pupil in our school system". I understand the schools budget is to be boosted by £4.5bn. Again, this is clearly an uplift - but over a three-year period, that equates to just £1.5bn a year (compared with an existing budget of £63.7bn). It also has to cover the cost of , and the promised uplift in teachers' pay. In any process of prioritisation there are losers as well as winners. We already know about planned cuts to the Department of Work and Pensions - but other unprotected departments like the Home Office and the Department of Communities and Local Government are braced for a real spending squeeze. We've heard dire warnings about austerity 2.0, and the impact that would have on the government's crime and policing priorities, its promises around housing and immigration, and on the budgets for cash-strapped local councils. The chancellor wants to make it clear to the markets she's sticking to her fiscal rules on balancing the books for day-to-day the decision to loosen the rules around borrowing to fund capital investment have given her greater room to manoeuvre in funding long-term infrastructure projects. That's why we've seen her travelling around the country this week to promote the £15.6bn she's spending on regional transport projects. The Treasury team clearly wants to focus on promoting the generosity of these kind of investments, and we'll hear more in the coming days. But there's a real risk the story of this spending review will be about the departments which have lost out - and the promises which could slip as a result.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Officials warn of 145 species poised to wreak havoc across nation: 'Prevention is the most effective approach'
The United Kingdom just updated its Invasive Species Horizon-scan, and — plot twist — it isn't Bigfoot we need to worry about. It's 145 real-world plants, animals, and pathogens poised to sneak in and wreak havoc. Professor Helen Roy, who led the UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology study, said, "Prevention is the most effective approach to mitigating the threat of invasive non-native species." Every few years, scientists sift through hundreds of potential invaders and flag the scariest ones for Britain's watchlist. The creatures in question are a range of species non-native to Great Britain. While they are not currently an issue, they made the list due to their potential for future destruction. The 2025 roundup ranges from purple Asian clams, which reproduce at lightning speed and clog drinking-water pipes, to the pine wood nematode, a microscopic worm that has wiped out pine forests from Portugal to Japan. This exercise is the third following 2013 and 2019 to prevent threatening invasive species in Britain. The goal is to assess the hundreds of non-native species from around the world that could potentially threaten Britain's native ecosystem. Invasive species don't play nicely. They out-compete native plants and animals for food, space, and sunlight, shredding biodiversity and the "free services" a healthy ecosystem provides. Imagine purple clams jamming a treatment plant and nudging everyone's water bill up, or seastars bulldozing oyster harvests and local jobs right along with them. Forest pests raise wildfire risk and threaten the timber industry. They can even ferry new pathogens — bad news for crops and public health alike. Protecting native species isn't just green talk; it's food security, clean water, and steady paychecks. On the policy front, DEFRA is beefing up border inspections. Researchers are also piloting an early-warning smartphone app that lets anyone snap a photo of a suspicious creature and beam it straight to scientists in real time. While scientists and researchers continue to monitor possible threats, communities are just as important. Professor Roy stated, "The public also plays a vital role by recording and reporting sightings of invasive non-native species, helping to inform action." Should the government be paying people to hunt invasive species? Definitely Depends on the animal No way Just let people do it for free Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Individuals have an equally important role. Before heading from one waterway to another, give boots, boats, and fishing gear a quick check. Clean and dry them to keep hitchhikers from spreading. When planting a garden, choose native species from a local nursery. This isn't the first battle with invasive species. For example, researchers use native birds to control the invasive spotted lanternfly along the East Coast and Midwest of the U.S. Small, everyday choices like these really add up. For more practical ways to protect local ecosystems, explore TCD's critical climate issues guide. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
