A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE 



quantity of uninteresting facts.'" Arkwright, weavers smashed Kay's loom. Hargreaves 



however, ought to be specially mentioned as jennies were destroyed by organized mobs, and 



a creator of businesses (as well as an adapter he himself was compelled to leave Lancashire for 



and improver of inventions), and also the Nottingham to work his invention. Far into 



Peels. Arkwright entered into several partner- the nineteenth century machine-wrecking was to 



ships, and was responsible for the establishment be feared ; the rioting during the strikes of i8 lO, 



or growth of numerous firms — the Strutt partner- the Middleton fights in i8i2, the campaign 



ship terminated in 1783. One of his partners against power-looms in particular in 1826, and 



was David Dale of the Lanark Mills,™ which the 'plug' riots of 1842 (so called because 



were afterwards sold by the latter to Robert factories were forcibly stopped by the with- 



Owen, who had been manager to Drinkwater, drawal of the plugs from the boilers) ought 



a Manchester spinner.^" Robert Peel, grand- specially to be mentioned."" The opposition to 



father of the statesman, and his sons were machinery was not without reason, and the 



great business projectors, but as the name of hand-loom weavers were driven into terrible 



the family is chiefly connected with calico- straits, though the cause of the extremity of 



printing, though the Peels undertook spinning distress to which they were reduced would seem 



and manufacturing on an impressive scale, to have been chiefly their unwillingness to enter 



the account of their work will be reserved for factories ; an extended demand for cotton goods 



the section . on calico-printing. It might be consequent upon their being cheapened appears 



mentioned here that a commercial society, out to have counteracted largely, if not entirely, the 



of which the Chamber of Commerce ultimately saving of labour by the machinery. The state of 



evolved, was started in Manchester in 1794.*'' the hand-loom weavers was investigated by a 



The new machines, whether for weaving or House of Commons committee which reported 



spinning, were not admitted without protest from in 1834 and 1835, and by a commission with 



the operatives and some masters. Many peti- assistant commissioners, from whom reports ap- 



tions were presented to Government (chiefly by peared from 1839 to 1841. Spinners had not 



weavers) praying for the taxing or suppressing of suffered in the same way. The water-frame 



machinery, and for the enforcement of appren- created a new industry (water-twist displacing 



ticeship rules or of a minimum wage."' The linen and woollen warps, which were in part 



operatives feared loss of work, and the masters imported), and jenny-spinning was not commonly 



feared the competition of better-equipped rivals, a man's trade until the jennies became large. 



Arkwright was confronted with a combination To work the latter and the mules much skill 



of masters, who were not willing that the laws was needed before the self-actor was perfected, 



should be altered to permit of an extension of which was not until fairly late in the nineteenth 



the British all-cotton manufacture."' Infuriated century. The shifting of some of the agricultural 



'" Some detaUs relating to the fint factories are PoP^l^^tion to th^ manufacturing districts of 



given above p. 385. Lancashire by the Poor Law Commissioners 



'" Arkwr'ight's remark that ' he would find a razor between 1835 and 1837 is itself indicative of the 



in Scotland to shave Manchester ' is an allusion to this augmented demand for labour.'*' 



p.irtncrship and his business dealings with Scotland. The improvements in machinery, which ulti- 



"* Robert Owen married David Dale's daughter. mately affected every process from cleaning the 



'" Elijah Helm, Chapters in the Hist, of the Manches- cotton to manufacturing, gave rein to the cotton 



ter Chamber of Commerce, i^. Much of this work is industry and soon rendered Lancashire pre- 



based on an old minute book ^,. , , eminently the workshop of the world for cottons. 



"" See e.g. Paper Xi, 1780, p. 6 (m vol. v of t^l r 11 • c c ■ ^ j 



Par/. Papers, conLing thoL boi .778 to ,782) ; The following figures of imported co ton are 



Par/. Papers 1 808, ii, 95-1 34 ; also 1 809, iii, 3 11 , significant of the rapid expansion that took place : 



and 1810-U, ii, 389-406. the enormous rate of growth between 1771 and 



'" Some notice ought to he taken of fiscal regulations ' ^O I is particularly noticeable : — 



directly affecting the British cotton industry. In 1741-ci 81 percent 



1700 an Act had been passed (11 and 12 William 17C1-61 . 2ii 



III, cap. 10) prohibiting the importation of the 1761— 71 2Ci 



printed calicoes of India, Persia, and China. In 1721 1771-81 7c3 



the Act 7 George I, cap. 7, interdicted the use of any 1781— qi ^loi 



' printed, painted, stained, or dyed calico,' excepting 1701-1801 67^ 



only calicoes dyed all blue, and muslins, neckcloths, 1801— ii 5q1 



and fustians. In 1 774, the remainder of the Act 1811-21 05 " 



7 George I, cap. 7, which was not set aside by the 1821-^1 8e " 



Act 9 George II, cap. 4 (allowing British calicoes with • • 5 » 



linen warps), was modified, in spite of the opposition ' British Manufactory.' The duty was varied from 



referred to above, by the Act 14 George II, cap. 72. time to time until repealed in 1831. 



The manufacture, use, and wear of cottons printed "° On machine-wrecking see RadclifFe, op. cit. 118; 



and stained, &c. was permitted subject to the payment Letters on the Uti/ity of Machines, 1780 ; Bamford, ij/9 



of a duty of 3<s'. per square yard (the same as the of a Radica/; KnArcv/, Fifty Tears of the Cotton Trade, Sic. 



excise on cotton-linens) provided they were stamped '" See Pari. Papers, 1843, xlv, 119-70. 



388 



