CHAPTER X

INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATION IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

BEFORE going on to consider changes in the organisation of the brass and copper industries in the eighteenth century it is perhaps worth while recalling the main conclusions reached in a previous chapter. It will be remembered that from their introduction into this country these industries were organised on a capitalistic basis. Brass-making, copper-smelting, battery and wire-drawing were all confined to factories; and so great was the capital required that the assistance of many English and German capitalists had to be secured, and so the companies concerned were organised on the joint stock principle. Furthermore, the dearth of skilled workmen in England made it imperative to import foreigners, very great numbers of whom were employed both in mining and manufacturing operations. The actual production of finished goods in brass and copper was partly carried on in such factories, and partly also by many independent workers in different parts of the country. It has been shown that towards the end of the seventeenth century the number of these workers greatly increased, as well as the number of trades employing brass and copper as raw materials. Finally, we have seen that great skill and individuality were required of all those connected with such trades.

It is obvious, then, that we must not expect in the organisation of these two industries striking changes, comparable to those which revolutionised some others. There was no rapid change to a factory system, for a large part of the brass and copper industries was already organised on such a basis; nor was there a disappearance of the small independent "manufacturer," for individual skill remained of paramount importance. The "small man" did not disappear; and so even to-day Birmingham, which is the great centre of the

brass and copper trades, is still, for the most part, a town where the unit of production is extremely small.

Yet, before going any further with the history of the organisation of these two industries, it is necessary to consider very briefly the characteristic features of the period of the "Industrial Revolution." This was the name applied by Arnold Toynbee to the momentous changes which took place in industry in the latter half of the eighteenth century and the beginning of the nineteenth; changes very frequently associated with the invention of the steam engine and various other mechanical improvements. It would be wrong, however, to take a narrow view of this period, and conclude that the "revolution "-if that word is really appropriate-merely meant a rapid transition from a domestic to a factory system of industry, and that it was caused by the inventions which stand out clearly in eighteenth century history. The roots lie much deeper, and the inventions are only a surface cause. For there had been many inventions of great importance long before, and it is much more likely that the inventions of the industrial era and the new methods that resulted were themselves caused by powerful economic factors. One might, indeed, go back to the great age of discoveries in Elizabethan and Stuart times in search of the fundamental causes of the industrial revolution; for the widening of the geographical horizon, with its vast extension of markets, has a much more direct bearing on eighteenth century history than appears when viewed superficially. Population, moreover, was making rapid strides, but at the beginning of the eighteenth century agricultural methods were not materially different from those which obtained in the Middle Ages. Sheer necessity demanded better organisation and greater productivity, and behind the great inventions and improvements were these vaster and more potent forces. "Necessity," once more, was the mother of invention.

The chief features of the industrial revolution may be classified briefly as follows:-(1) The enclosure of land for food production, which went along with important improvements in agricultural methods; (2) the great development of machinery, and the application of steam power to inSee "The Industrial Revolution of the Eighteenth Century in England," 1908.

R

industry; (3) the supersession of the domestic by the factory system, which meant the creation of a wage-earning class, and which also meant division of labour and minute specialisation; (4) improvements in transport, and the creation of great industrial centres. As far as we are concerned, only the last three call for consideration. It must be emphasised that such changes did not affect all industries alike. While the heavy part of the brass and copper trades was carried on upon a factory basis from Elizabethan times, there were other industries which retained their domestic character right down to recent times, and some even to the present day. We must not look on the Industrial Revolution as a definite period of rapid change; it should rather be regarded as a very long period of transition, during which the forces causing the changes gathered weight, until they reached their full momentum in the second half of the eighteenth century and the first half of the nineteenth. During that period the changes were more violent in their nature, and had perhaps more serious social reactions than at any other time; but future historians may look on our present age as one of changes no less important and no less violent than those associated with the years between 1760 and 1830.

The classification of the different branches of the brass and copper industries is a problem of great complexity. At one end of the scale we have the large company with a considerable capital, carrying on smelting, brass-making, battering or rolling, wire-drawing, and, in some cases, going through all the operations in the production of certain finished goods; at the other end of the scale we have the "small master," or independent workman, using brass merely as one of his raw materials. Intermediate between these two extremes there is an infinite variety of trades. At one stage we have the brass founder, who required a small amount of capital and employed several workpeople, using brass ingots as his raw material, and going through all the operations in the production of such articles as locks, door handles, hinges, brass fittings for furniture and for carriages and harness, etc.; at another stage we have the specialised worker producing buttons or buckles, and using different materials of which brass was usually one, or we have the brass candlestick maker, the cock founder, the locksmith, the thimble maker,

the brass nail maker, etc., all concerned solely with the making of particular commodities and all using brass. At one point the brass and copper trades fade off into the toy trade, at another into the iron trade, or into the jewellery trade, or, at a later date, into the engineering trade.

It is necessary, then, to adopt some principle of classification. One might take as the basis particular processes, such as brass-making, rolling, casting, stamping, etc., or one might adopt an economic classification based on the principles enunciated in a previous chapter. There are, however, decided advantages in classifiying our industries on the basis of the form of organisation. If we consider such criteria as the size of the unit of production, the use of capital, the specialisation and aggregation of labour, the differentiation of function between the artisan, the organiser, the merchant and the capitalist, the application of machinery and the feasibility of standardised production, it is possible to make a twofold division, with mining, smelting, brass-making, battering or rolling and wire-drawing in one category, and brass and copper using trades in another. When we come to deal with the second category, it will be convenient to consider a classification based on processes.

I

It was shown in an earlier chapter that the industries in the first group were organised on a capitalistic basis, under which the workers were brought together under the common roof or within the works' of the employer. With the Mines Royal and the Battery Company many of those who provided the capital took little or no part in the actual operations. Supervision and direction were left to a few, and the majority of the shareholders, some of whom were in Germany, were content to be sleeping partners. In some cases the works were even leased to certain shareholders in return for a definite rent. With the passing of these companies and the appearance of the new copper and brass undertakings at the end of the seventeenth century and the beginning of the eighteenth, organisation remained practically the same, except in so far as the chief features of a factory system became more pronounced as the unit of production increased, and as

division of labour was elaborated. But this development was very gradual all through the eighteenth century. The same necessity existed for large capitals in copper smelting as in brass-making and manufacturing sheets and wire, and the same forces making for integration were at work. The copper companies, which were founded in the last decade of the seventeenth century, and which survived the speculative activity of that period, were considerable undertakings and were organised on the joint stock principle. The good prospect of copper mining in Elizabethan times had encouraged German capitalists to invest in the industry, so that, as has been shown already, they held almost half the shares in the Mines Royal, while the remainder was, for the most part, in the hands of members of the English nobility. By the time the revival of copper mining took place capital was more abundant in England, and it would seem that the bulk of what was subscribed for the new companies came from merchants who had amassed money in trade. There is actually little information about the origin of the shareholders in these copper companies, but, generally speaking, it appears that they were mainly London merchants, who presumably had amassed capital in trade, which they were now prepared to invest in industry. It is remarkable that, as soon as the way was opened for private capitalists by the passing of the Mines Royal Act in 1689, many new undertakings were formed. The extent to which foreign capital and skill were used will become evident as we examine one of those undertakings.

The English Copper Company was incorporated in 1691, and in the following year the market value of its capital stood at £39,900. The total stock was divided into 700 shares, but as a result of the amalgamation in 1720 with two other concerns- one at Wimbledon and the other at Redbrook-the number of shares was increased to 21,000 of £5 each, thus giving a capital of £105,000. Some of the new shares were credited to the old shareholders without payment, while the proprietors of the two works, which were being absorbed, were permitted to take up a certain number at par. It is impossible to say how many shareholders there were, or how much was subscribed by individuals, but perhaps we get a clue in the case of the amalgamation. Chambers, who had been the proprietor of