CHAPTER II THE ECONOMIC BASIS OF THE NEW INDUSTRIAL GROUP The preceding discussion has viewed the great inventions as the natural outcome of a remarkable and widespread outburst of inventive interest and activity. The great manufacturers in a few cases contributed personally to the stock of new inventions, but in most instances they merely utilized the devices of other men-of men who labored not so much because of hope of reward from the manufacturers for the use of their devices as because of the inspiration of the prevailing spirit of invention. These new machines constituted the instruments of the power of the new industrial class. The industrial value inherent in the new machines was of course the result of their productive and competitive power. This is an obvious fact-so obvious, indeed, that its importance has perhaps not been duly recognized. To the people of the time, the fact was far from obvious or commonplace, nor was its importance without recognition. By putting oneself in the place of a contemporary observer, and by remembering, too, that the eighteenth century mind was markedly rational and restrained, we may the more readily per ceive the significance of the superlatives applied to the new inventions. They are described as "great and extraordinary;" "most wonderful;" "astonishing;" "amazing;" "almost miraculous;" "unparalleled in the annals of the world." Their ef fect is beyond description, but is likened to a sudden explosion. They have reached an "incredible" perfection, with productive value "beyond the powers of calculation." They give a facility to labor "scarcely conceivable." They have laid "the founda tions of a very extended commerce," and their effect on industry has been progress "rapid beyond example." The transformation is described by various writers as a "revolution." They have enabled the cotton industry to make "a gigantic stride,' to attain an "enormous height," and to achieve a "progressive and astonishing increase." As a result of "ingenious machinery," the cotton industry "has burst forth as it were, on the country in a moment, giving a spring at the same time to the industry of the people, unexampled in the annals of the world." The inventions have caused Manchester goods "to spread in ten thousand forms and colors, not only in these kingdoms, but over all Europe; and even into distant continents." They are expected to produce "great changes ...... in the appearance of the civilized world," and the magnitude of their benefits "can scarcely be estimated." The "discoveries and improvements" of the early years of George III's reign "diffuse a glory over this country unattainable by conquest or dominion," and promise to "stamp a lustre" on his Majesty's reign "to the latest generations."' 45 Such are some of the terms of unmeasured praise recurring in the writings of the time in recognition of the productive value of the new machines. Most writers contented themselves with 43 Annals of Agriculture, Vol. 9, pp. 286, 502, Vol. 10, pp. 253, 281, 579, Vol. 12, pp. 513, 514; European Magazine, Vol. 11, pp. 364, 367, Vol. 20, p. 216; Gentleman's Magazine, Vol. 57, Pt. 1, p. 465; Transactions (of the Society of Arts), Vol. 1, pp. 34, 35; Encyclopedia Britannica, 3d ed., Vol. 5, pp. 488, 489, Vol. 10, Art. Manchester; Chambers' Encyclopedia, Dedication, Vol. 1, pp. i, ii (1786); Life of Robert Owen, Vol. 1, p. 52; J. Aikin, Description of the Country from thirty to forty miles round Manchester, pp. 172, 174; T., Letters on the Utility and Policy of Employing Machines to Shorten Labor, pp. 4, 9; New and Old Principles of Trade Compared, pp. 32, 33; T. Gisborne, An Enquiry into the Duties of Men, p. 551; [Ogden], A Description of Manchester by a Native of the Town, p. 90; An Important Crisis in the Calico and Muslin Manufactory, p. 1 (quoted by Mantoux, La Revolution Industrielle, p. 248); Anderson, Historical and Chronological Deduction of the Origin of Commerce, ed. 1789, Vol. 4, pp. 705, 706. ...... indefinite exclamations concerning the nature of the transformation, but some attempted definite statements or estimates. Crompton's machine often carried 150 spindles and drew weft "to an exact fineness up to 150 hanks in the pound." A tourist in the north of England wrote of the "incredible circumstance'' of one pound of cotton having been spun by machinery into 356 hanks, each hank containing 840 yards, a total length of 169.9 miles. He adds that to enumerate the various kinds of cotton goods then made "would be to count the sands of the sea. Another writer marvels at the fact that "with one great water wheel, above 4000 threads of cotton yarn are spun at once, of which the finest muslins are manufactured." A manufacturer estimated in 1791 that by means of machines, "ability to spin was increased an hundred fold" in twenty years. 44 The exact extent of the increase of productive power cannot be ascertained. The increase was by no means uniform, nor was it limited to a given period or to a given process or branch of manufacture. A modern estimate for the spinning of cotton yarn of forty hanks to the pound is to the effect that in 1812 labor was fourteen times more productive than in 1779 (a vast increase of productive power already having taken place), nine times more productive than in 1784, and four times more productive than in 1799. * 45 From the point of view of accuracy, the value of such estimates, either contemporaneous or recent, is extremely questionable. Indeed, to the writers of the time, the extent of increased productive power appeared to be measureable not so much by the perfection of mechanism and the resulting enlargement of out "Aikin, Description of the Country Round Manchester, pp. 172. 174; European Magazine, Vol. 20, p. 216; Anderson, Historical and Chronological Deduction of the Origin of Commerce, ed. 1789, Vol. 4, pp. 705, 706; H. Wansey, Wool Encouraged without Exportation, p. 67. "T. Ellison, The Cotton Trade of Great Britain, p. 55. put, as by the rapid growth of those industries in which the labor-saving devices were being used. It was estimated that the income from cotton manufacturing, including wages, increased from £200,000 in 1768 to £7,000,000 in 1788. The gross value of cotton goods, as late as 1781, was £2,000,000, while £2,000,000, while in 1787 it had increased to £7,500,000. In the processes of manufacture, the value of the cotton was increased 1000% to 5000%. In 1769, not more than 50,000 wheels were employed in spinning cotton; twenty years later, the number of spindles was nearly 2,000,000. The cotton spinning machinery in operation in 1789 could spin an amount equal to the output of one million hands with the spinning wheel. An estimate of the number actually employed in the factories for spinning cotton in 1788 was 110,000, almost half of the number being children. On this basis, the productive power of labor in spinning was increased by means of the improved machinery more than ninefold. The figures are probably exaggerated; but since the tendency to exaggerate applied to both sets of figures, the proportion would remain about the same. In the view of one writer, "the progressive and astonishing increase of this manufacture will be best explained" by the recent four-fold increase of cotton imports, which in 1787 amounted to 22,000,000 pounds. 46 Aikin, Description of the Country ...... Round Manchester, p. 178, ff. (including extensive quotations from An Important Crisis in the Calico and Muslin Manufactory in Great Britain Explained); Annals of Agriculture, Vol. 12, pp. 513-520; Encyclopedia Britannica, 3d ed., Vol. 5, Art. Cotton (written about 1790-see Bibliography). The figures given in dn Important Crisis were used not only by Aikin but also to some extent by the other writers here cited. See critical note concerning this work in S. J. Chapman's article on Cotton Manufacture in the 11th edition of the Ency clopedia Britannica, Vol. 7, p. 285. It is not maintained that the figures cited above are accurate, nor did the writers themselves pretend an exactness of information. But there is significance in the fact that important writers of the time gave credence to the estimates in an attempt to state more definitely the extent of the remarkable growth of industry due to the new methods. The rapid growth of industry in the new manufacturing centers was accompanied by a general economic expansion. Further evidences of the remarkable productive power and value of the new machines were observed by the people of the time in the rapid increase of wealth and growth of population resulting from their use, together with the shifting of wealth and population to the north of England. The effect of the inventions on Manchester and the surrounding region was a subject of frequent comment and marvel. An indication of the change is to be found in the contrast between the accounts in the second and third editions of the Encyclopedia Britannica. The article on Lancashire in the second edition, published as late as 1780, mentioned in detail the streams of the shire, stating that the region was thoroughly watered, but otherwise the only significance assigned to the streams was to the ef fect that one of them "is noted for producing the fattest eels in England." The article on Manchester makes no mention of inventions, and merely states that the town is prosperous and has "several curious manufactures known at London by the name of Manchester goods." In the article on Lancashire in the third edition, there is a vivid picture of the industrial processes going on along the rivers and canals of the region. The article on Manchester describes the rapid growth of the city in wealth, industry and population. It is estimated that the city trebled its population in fifty years, the immediately preceding years in particular having witnessed the building of innumerable houses and a rapid congestion of population, which is estimated at 68,580. The city was remodeled, and the new streets were "spacious and airy;" 2,000 street lamps were installed and nearly two hundred watchmen were employed by the city. It is estimated that 20,000 of its population were employed in the fac "From internal evidence it is ascertained that this article was written in 1792. See Bibliography. |