the Rise and Fall of Enlgand, IX. C. Carson

By contrast, England's leader ship in the nineteenth century was based hardly at all upon suc cess with the arts of war. It is true that England was on the victorious side in the Napoleonic wars. It is also true that the British navy maintained a pre ponderance on the seas through out the century. It should be ac664 THE FREEMAN November knowledged, too, that Britain be came more expansive and con quest-minded toward the end of the period. But England's suc cesses were mainly in the arts of peace, and it was for these pri marily that she was admired and imitated. Britain's leadership was commercial, not military, and it was in such areas as form of gov ernment, free trade, and manu facturing that her ways were ini tially followed. Growth in Manufacturing Britain's commercial leadership was first asserted in the realm of manufacturing. It was this par ticular leadership that led J. D.

Chambers to refer to Britain as The Workshop of the World from around 1820 to 1880. The spurt in the growth of manufacturing began in the 1780's, as has already been shown, and would continue to mount for much of the nine teenth century. England had long been a major producer of woolen goods, but now took the lead in cotton textiles. They were the ma jor export item throughout the century - "amounting to one-half of the value in the early nineteenth century and about one-quarter a hundred years later .... In 1912 an English economist declared that 'the export trade in manu factured cotton goods from this country is in money value the greatest export trade in manu factured goods of any kind from any country in the world.'''1 One estimate has it that there was in general a tenfold indus trial output increase between 1820 and 1913.2 One area of dramatic increase was coal production. "From an approximate ten mil lion tons in 1800, the output of British mines rose to forty-four million tons in 1850, and, under the gigantic stimulus of the thirty years of prosperity which fol lowed, to 154 million tons in 1880."3 Iron production rose mightily throughout the century, too. It is estimated that in 1740 a little over 17,000 tons was pro duced. "Between 1827 and 1840 the annual production of pig in Great Britain increased from 690,000 tons to 1,390,000. It more than doubled again by 1854, when it reached 3,100,000 tons."4 By the end of the century production had reached 8 million tons. 5 In the course of the century, " precision 1 E. Lipson, The Growth of English Society (London: A. and C. Black, 1959, 4th ed.), pp. 330-3l.

2 M. W. Flinn, An Economic and So cial History of Britain (London: Mac millan, 1965), p. 235. 3 J. D. Chambers, The Workshop of the World (London: Oxford University Press, 1961), pp. 43-44. 4 Gilbert Slater, The Growth of Mod ern England (London: Constable, 1939, 2nd ed.), p. 345. 5 Lipson, Ope cit., p. 335.

1968 THE WORKSHOP OF THE WORLD 665 toolmaking had come to he a ma jor British industry and the man ufacture of interchangeable stan dard parts and the use of machine tools which could adjust measure ments to a thousandth of an inch had become commonplace."6 Compared with Other Nations To show Britain's place of lead ership in the world, however, it is necessary to compare British eco nomic activity with that of other leading countries. Great Britain's percentage of manufacturing pro duction in the world was 31.8 in 1870. By comparison, that of the United States was 23.3, that of Germany 13.2, and that of France 10.3, among the leading countries. 7 In 1860, Britain had 23 per cent of world trade, compared with 11 per cent for France and 9 per cent for the United States. 8 In 1880, Britain had more than 61h million tons of shipping plying the seas, compared to less than 11h million by the United States, the nearest competitor. 9 Britain, too, was banker for much of the world, as investments poured out to developing and undeveloped 6 Walter L. Arnstein, Britain: Yester day and Today (Boston: D. C. Heath, 1966), p. 73.

7 Shepard B. Clough, European Eco nomic History (New York: McGraw Hill, 1968, rev. ed.), p. 397. 8 Ibid., p. 338. 9 Ibid., p. 346. countries, the gold capital, and the center for the major insurance firm, Lloyd's of London. Though agricultural products played little role in British ex ports, it is indicative of general British productivity that for much of the century production contin ued to rise. Despite the great growth in population, up until the middle of the nineteenth century Britain grew most of the wheat consumed in the country and al most all animal products. One his torian notes that the increasing productivity could be "attributed to the employment of capital in improving the soil, in draining, manuring and above all in taking in new land suitable for mixed farming."lO The period when England was most clearly the workshop of the world falls roughly between the late 1840's and the mid 1870's.

This was, in many ways, the golden age of British leadership and affluence. It fell between the repeal of the Corn Laws and Navi gation Acts and the onset of pro tectionism abroad once more. It was a time when the energies of Englishmen were released by lib erty and turned to constructive efforts in the arts of peace. "For most Englishmen, these two dec ades were ... years of prosperity. All things considered, it ,vas a 10 Chambers, Ope cit., p. 77.

666 THE FREEMAN November period of social harmony in which both talk and consciousness of class division subsided. It was an age when underlying assumptions about the necessity for a high de gree of individualism at home, free trade abroad, and progress in the affairs of mankind were ac cepted by most .... "11 The commercial leadership of Britain in the world was not the achievement of a few men, some of whose names adorn the pages of history. It was, rather, the accomplishment of very nearly a whole people. England became the workshop of the world not only by the efforts of statesmen, in ventors, entrepreneurs, financiers, large farmers, industrialists, and shippers but also by the applica tion of the energies of miners, factory workers, sailors, steam fitters, mechanics, field hands, weavers, smelters, and so on through an almost interminable list of employments. Not all con tributed in the same degree to this great productivity, but all who employed their minds, hands, and/ or savings in constructive activity played some part in it.

How Did the Workers Fare? This brings us to what is prob ably the most controversial ques tion about nineteenth century En glish history. Namely, how did the 11 Arnstein, Ope cit., p. 69. workers fare in the workshop of the world? More specifically, did the toilers in field, factory, and mine receive their due reward for their contributions to English pro ductivity? To put the question in more answerable terms, did the English people benefit generally from this great productivity, or was the productivity achieved at the expense and by the exploita tion of a large portion of the pop ulace, as is sometimes alleged? To put it yet another way, did indus trialization redound to the benefit or the harm of many of those who wrought it? These questions have been the subject of intense investigation over many years, by economic his torians and others. Positions about them have been woven into or made the bases of ideologies. They have long since become grist for the mills of politicians, and po litical polemics and parliamentary studies have poured forth, fre quently indistinguishable from one another. Scholarly studies of the last several decades have done much to place these developments in perspective and to mediate the claims and counterclaims of in terested parties.

From the outset, there were those who believed or claimed that the results of industrialization were greatly harmful to England. As Lipson says, "It was a common 1968 THE WORKSHOP OF THE WORLD 667 view that, bad as was American slavery, 'the white slavery in the manufactories of England was far worse.' Robert Owen asserted that the effect of all the 'splendid im provements,' had 'hitherto been to demoralize society through the misapplication of the new 'wealth created.' "12 The following is a recent statement of the impact of early industrialization. "The ini tial growth·of these industries could only be achieved by the reg imentation of vast armies of cheap labour. Herded together in the slum towns of the nineteenth century, these victims of industrial prog ress had to wait until hard-won experience in handling the new problems of urban life slowly res cued them from their unhealthy squalor ."13 Despite the Hardships, Conditions Steadily Improved In view of all that has been written upon the subject, and par ticularly of lengthy and thorough scholarly studies, it is unlikely that anything new can be added.

What can be done is to review briefly the arguments, try to dis cern in what direction reason and evidence points, and bring the weight of expert judgment of those who have studied it to bear on the question. 1:2 Lipson, op. cit., p. 244. 13 Flinn, op. cit., p. 234. The historical record is clear that there was much hardship and suffering in nineteenth cen tury England. Men, women, and children did frequently work long hours at exacting tasks and in un pleasant surroundings. Employ ment did fluctuate, and there were periodic depressions. Families did live in squalid factory towns and in housing with meager appoint ments. A leader of Chartism in the nineteenth century reported the following about the lives of some of the poor in London. "In whole streets that we visited we found nothing worthy of the name of bed, bedding or furniture .... Their unpaved yards and filthy courts, and the want of drainage and cleansing, rendered their houses hotbeds of disease; so that fever combined with hunger was committing great ravages among them."14 No doubt, too, workers were de pendent upon employers for their livelihood, and if they were laid off they might have little or no resources until they found new employment. Wages were hardly such as to lead to early affluence.

Thomas Carlyle spoke of "half a million hand-loom weavers work ing fifteen hours a day in per petual inability to procure there by enough of the coarsest food; English farm labourers at nine 14 Lipson, op. cit., p. 245.

668 THE FREEMAN November shillings and at seven shillings a week."15 That hardship and suffering abounded in the nineteenth cen tury, even in the midst of rising productivity, there is no reason to doubt. That suffering existed is not the issue, however. The rele vant question is: What was the relation of industrialization and greater productivity to the ma terial well-being of workers and of the populace generally? Did they suffer in consequence of it, or was their lot ameliorated by it? Poverty Always a Problem Of all the interpretations of his tory, it would be difficult to find one more perverse than that which ascribes the suffering to indus trialization. Such an interpreta tion flies in the face of both rea son and evidence. How could great er productivity result in an in crease of hardship? It flies in the face, too, of the actions and de cisions of the workers themselves, of economic theory, of the judg ment of nations, and of what men generally have sought to imitate.

Yet, such an interpretation has frequently been offered, from the beginning to the present day. The first thing to be noted is that most of the hardships pointed to by critics were not new to the nineteenth century. Hardship and 15 Ibid., p. 244. suffering have been the common lot of most men throughout the ages. Hours of work have been long and unremitting for those who would produce much for so long that the memory of man runneth not to the contrary. Wom en and children have usually worked alongside· the men, or at other tasks. Periods of employ ment have always alternated with periods of inactivity· for most people. Farming, which has en gaged most workers at most times, is by its very nature seasonal. Much of the year there is little productive work to be done. Other employments have rarely had greater regularity, if household servitude is left out of account. Depressions have occurred off and on throughout history, in consequence of wars, market changes, changes in the money supply, and so on. Housing has been squalid from time imme morial. Death by disease and mal nutrition greatly antedates the awareness of these as causes of death, and, indeed, goes back no doubt to the very appearance of life on this planet. The squalid housing of industrial towns was probably superior to that in the countryside from which many of the inhabitants came. Most work ers have ever been dependent upon someone for employment, whether landlord or master.

1968 THE WORKSHOP OF THE WORLD 669 Signs of Progress What was new in the nineteenth century, then, was not toil and hardship. On the contrary, it was the beginning of the amelioration of these. It was only in the wake of the much greater employment of machinery that hours of work could be reduced without result ing in increasing deprivation. It was only as work was organized in factories, and large companies became common, that employment began to be regular rather than seasonal and intermittent. Regu lar employment became common, too, after predictable transporta tion was developed, particularly the railroad, and world-wide mar kets were opened. Indeed, it is probable that some of the discon tent among workmen arose from a lack of enthusiasm about the regularity, punctuality, and dis ciplined character of factory work. Sanitary conditions only came to prevail after causal relationships were discovered between filth and refuse, on the one hand, and dis ease on the other. Making towns and cities habitable places was also greatly aided by cheap pipes, lighting, and transport facilities, themselves a part of the indus trialization. As to wages, they could and did rise as the produc tivity of workers increased through the use of new techniques and mechanical· aids.

Far from being the cause of toil and hardship, then, the in dustrialization and increased pro ductivity were the means of which these were relieved or made less burdensome. That this was so from the beginning needs to be made clear. Many writers who attest that many improvements eventu ally came from industrialization maintain that in its early stages there was much harshness. Harsh, things may have been, but this should in no sense be attributed to the industrialization. Even if life was harsher for some than it had been for their forebears, this should not be attributed to the industrial changes. Let us turn now to the evidence for the im provements which followed upon the use of new techniques and machinery. Population Explosion One of the best evidences for the general improvement which came in the wake of these develop ments is the growth of popula tion. Estimates indicate that there were about five and a half million people in England and Wales in 1700, and that the population had increased to about six and a half million in 1750.16 When the first census was taken in 1801, the 16 See T. S. Ashton, The Industrial Revolution (New York: Oxford Uni versity Press, 1964), p. 4.

670 THE FREEMAN November population was a little under 8,900,000. 17 By 1831, it had reached 13,897,000; by 1851, 17,928,000; by 1901, 32,528,000.1 8 Even if conditions had worsened in the early years of industrialization, then, it should be ascribed to the pressure of population. But there is no reason to read the history of these years in this fashion. On the contrary, the increase in population should be ascribed to improved and improving condi tions. Ashton notes that the rising population should not be attrib uted to any extensive change in the birth rate, for it remained at about the same level for the years 1740 to 1830. Nor does inward migration explain the increase in population, for there were prob ably more people leaving England for other shores than were coming in. The increase should be attrib uted to the decline in the mortal ity rate due to the "substitution of wheat for inferior cereals ... , an increased consumption of vege tables ... ," better "standards of personal cleanliness, associated with more soap and cheaper cot ton underwear ... ," the "use of brick in place of timber in the walls .... The larger towns were paved, drained, and supplied with 17 J. Steven Watson, The Reign of George III (London: Oxford University Press, 1960), p. 517.

18 Arnstein, Ope cit., p. 378. running water; knowledge of medicine and surgery developed; hospitals and dispensaries in creased; and more attention was paid to such things as the dis posal of refuse and the proper burial of the dead."19 Another his torian says, "Even in the slums of the new industrial towns ex pectation of life was better than ever before. People were already, on the whole, better fed, better clothed, less likely to contract dis: ease and better cared for when they did, than during the eight eenth century."20 He is speaking of the situation as it existed in 1815. How Workers Behaved One of the best evidences of the impact of industrialization is the behavior toward it of those in need. There is no doubt that those looking for employment flocked to the new factory towns from the outset. Far from being re pelled by conditions in factory towns which writers have since deplored, they were irresistibly drawn to them. The most notable movement of workers was into northern England. "Technical im provement in the newly develop ing industries of these regions 19 Ashton, Ope cit., pp. 4-5.

~o David Thomson, England in the Nineteenth Century (Baltimore: Pen guin Books, 1950), p. 11.

1968 THE WORKSHOP OF THE WORLD \)71 served as magnets to attract not only capital _but population as well. . . . Large numbers were attracted from the surrounding agricultural regions .... But large numbers came from regions more remote. . . ." They came from southern England, from Scotland, and from Ireland. "Officials in the growing industrial centers often became alarmed, in fact, by the rapid influx of laborers, and ... even made attempts ... to check the flow from the vast reservoirs of unemployed in other regions.":!1 There was a general trend over the years for wages to rise. Of course, this trend was not uni form throughout nor universal. Machinery was adopted at differ ent paces in different industries. There were always workers and processes that were marginal or becoming submarginal, and wages would reflect such situations. Nevertheless, the trend was up. One survey indicates that if wages in 1790 be taken as 100 they had risen to 137.4 by 1845. Money wages had gone much higher than this during the Napoleonic wars, but after the war prices fell. The overall trend during most peace time years was stable or higher money wages coupled with lower :.!1 Witt Bowden, Industrial Society in England Tpward the End of the Eighteenth Century (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1965, 2nd ed.), pp. 95-96.

prices. 22 In the third quarter of the nineteenth century there was probably the most dramatic sus tained improvement in wages and living conditions that had ever occurred in English history. "Money wages, with a few slight lapses, rose steadily between 1850 and 1874. From a base of 100 in 1850 it has been calculated that the general level rose to 156 by 1874. . . . For these reasons the standard of living and prosperity of the mass of the workers rose greatly throughout the period."23 Another measure of the relative prosperity of workers was the amount of saving. Records of the growth of savings are to be found in the increase of membership in what were called "friendly soci eties" and in deposits in savings banks. Membership in friendly societies increased from some where between six and seven hun dred thousand in 1801 to 1,500,000 in the late 1840's. There were over a million depositors in savings banks in 1844, with 27 million pounds to their credit. 24 The indications are, too, that living conditions continued to im prove. The death rate per year continued to fall: in London from :l:2 Llewellyn Woodward, The Age of Reform (London: Oxford University Press, 1962), p. 11.

:2:3 Thomson, op. cit., p. 143. :2-1 Chambers, op. cit., pp. 210-11.

672 THE FREEMAN November 23.8 per thousand in 1841-51 to 21 per thousand in 1871-81; in north ern industrial towns for the same period from 28.1 to 24.6. One writer notes, "Lord Shaftesbury on his eighty-third birthday in 1884, remarked on 'the enormous improvement' in the housing and sanitation of London during the previous thirty years, and it may well be true that London was the healthiest large town in the world."25 Not UtopiaBut Marked Improvement How did the workers fare, then, in the Workshop of the World? They fared well, indeed. They fared well in comparison with workers of other ages and times. They fared well in comparison with their parents and grand parents. They fared well in com parison with workers in, most other countries, if not all other countries. Their wages were ris ing in relation to the costs of what they bought. Housing and sanitation were improving. If a workman did not like his em ployer, he could seek out a differ ent one. If he did not like to be an 25 Ibid., pp. 188-89.

employee, he could, perchance, save his wages and go into busi ness for himself. Some did, and many more could have. If he did not like conditions in England, he could migrate. English workmen could hope, and they were free. Of course, England was not utopia, not even in the· halcyon days from 1850 to the 1870's. There was much and long toil; wages were less than one might desire; people still died as a result of accidents and disease; there was tragedy and grief, as in all ages. The hardship and suffering were surely due mainly, however, to the human condition, to the fact that man must earn his keep by the sweat of his brow in tem perate climes, to the fact that there are numerous other organ isms preying upon him and vying with him for the limited suste nance on this planet, to the scar city of goods and services and the insatiability of human wants and desires. Change in processes and equipment could not make this earth other than what it is - a place of trial and tribulation - but it could bring improvement. That is what industrialization did, even, or especially, for workers.. ~ The next article of this series will discuss "The Victorian Way: Affirmed and Rejected."