Karl Marx

The State of British Factory Industry

[New-York Daily Tribune, No. 6016, August 6, 1860]

London, July 10, 1860

The reports of the factory inspectors which have just been published comprise only three reports: The district recently given up by Mr. Leonard Horner has been partly amalgamated with the district of Sir John Kincaid (Scotland) and partly with Mr. Redgrave’s district, which now comprises 3,075 factories and print works, while Mr. Robert Baker’s district (Ireland and some parts of England) remains within its old limits. The following is a general summary, showing the total number of accidents reported to the three inspectors during the six months ending 30 April 1860:

Accidents caused by machinery

 Adults Young Persons Children Total Grand
 m. f. m. f. m. f. m. f. total
Fatal accidents 14 3 7 2 2 2 23 7 30
Amputation of right hand or
 right arm 5 6 3 1 1 - 9 7 16
Amputation of left hand or
 left arm 4 1 7 3 1 - 12 4 16
Amputation of part of the
 right hand 23 24 29 22 15 7 67 53 120
Amputation of part of the
 left hand 16 17 21 18 8 7 45 42 87
Amputation of part of leg
 or foot 5 - 1 - - - 6 - 6
Fractures of limbs and bones
 of the trunk 30 11 43 11 11 4 84 26 110
Fracture of hand or leg 39 43 30 37 20 15 89 95 184
Head and face injuries 20 17 23 29 11 4 54 40 94
Lacerations, contusions, and
 other injuries not
 enumerated above 268 255 315 352 128 66 711 673 1,384
 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -----
Total 424 377 479 465 197 105 1,100 947 2,047

Accidents not caused by machinery 83 30 59 26 21 10 163 66 229

The reports unanimously testify to the extraordinary business activity during this half-year. The demand for labour-power was so great that in some branches of industry the supply of workers was insufficient. This difficulty prevailed less in the woollen mills, where the improved machinery allowed the manufacturers to dispense with hand labour, than in cotton and worsted mills, where many machines stood idle for want of labour-power, especially younger hands. To meet this temporary shortage of labour-power, some evil practices were resorted to in the past. When, in the infancy of the factory system, manufacturers were short of labour-power, it was obtained directly by application to the poor-law guardians of distant parishes, who sent a certain number of apprentices, children of tender age, who were bound to the manufacturers for a term of years. Once the children had been put out to apprentice, the poor-law officials congratulated the parishes concerned that they had got rid of useless mouths, whilst the manufacturers set about making the most of the transaction by maintaining the children on the cheapest possible terms and squeezing out of them all the labour-power they were capable of yielding. Hence the first of the series of Factory Acts, that of 1802, passed in the 42nd year of George III (c. 73), was entitled “An Act for the Preservation of the Health and Morals of Apprentices and others employed in Cotton and other Mills, and Cotton and other Factories,” and was intended merely to mitigate the evils of the apprenticeship system. But as

improvements in machinery were made, a different kind of labour-power became scarce when trade revived and the population of the neighbourhood could not supply the spinning mills with a full complement of labour-power. These manufacturers sent over to Ireland and fetched Irish families over. But Ireland has ceased to be the market that can supply labour-power at England’s demand, and the manufacturers must now look out for families in the southern and western counties of England, who might be tempted by the present wages in the northern counties to start on a new field of labour. Agents have been sent through the whole country to set forth the advantages offered to families by removal to the factory districts, and they are authorised to make agreements for migration to the North. Many families are said to have been set on their way by these agents. However, the migration of a man with his wife and children into a factory town has the special disadvantage that the younger members of the family, who can be quickly trained and whose services become useful in a relatively short time, are in great demand, while there is no particular demand for the labour-power of the man and his wife, who are inexperienced in factory work. This has induced some manufacturers to return, to a certain extent, to the old apprenticeship system, and to make agreements with the poor-law authorities for the labour of destitute pauper children for a stipulated time. In these cases the manufacturers provide the children with lodging, clothing and food, but pay them no regular wages. With the return to this system, the complaints about its abuse appear to have revived as well. It must not, however, be overlooked that this kind of labour-power is only sought after when no other can be had, for it is very expensive. The ordinary wage for a boy of 13 would be about 4s. weekly; but to house, clothe, feed, provide medical attendance and proper superintendence for 50 to 100 such boys, and to pay them some little allowance, cannot be done for 4s. per head per week.

A comparison of the wages paid to factory operatives in 1839 and 1859 reveals the most interesting fact that wages have risen, at least nominally, in the factories where the hours of labour were restricted to 60 hours a week, while with few exceptions they have actually fallen in the print works, bleach works and dye works, where the hours of labour of children, young persons and women are unrestricted, and where they are sometimes employed 14 and 15 hours a day. The following tables refer to the cotton trade in Manchester and its neighbourhood:

Weekly wages

(Working hours per week: 1839—69; 1859—60)

| Occupation 1859 |
|---|---|---|
| | s. | d. | s. | d. |
| Steam-engine drivers – – |
| Warehouse boys – – |
| Warehouse men – – |
| Carding room — carders (young women and girls) – – |
| Strippers (young men) – – |
| Overlookers – – |
| Carders (boys 14–18) – – |
| Drawing-frame hands (young women) 6 – |
| Spinning room — mule spinners | 16–18 | – | 20–22 | – |
| Piecers (women and young men) – – |
| Overlookers – – |
| Doubling room — doublers (women) – – |
| Warpers (girls) – – |
| Overlookers – – |
| Hand-labourers (young men) – – |

In the reeling room, the singeing room, and at the power looms, there was likewise a slight rise in wages. The predictions of those who warned the factory operatives that they would suffer serious disadvantage from the shortening of their hours of labour have thus been completely refuted. If, on the other hand, we compare the movement of wages in those branches where the daily hours of labour are legally unlimited:

Calico printing, dyeing, bleaching, 60 hours per week

| | Weekly wages (in s.) |
|---|---|
| Colour mixer 32 |
| Machine printer 38 |
| Foreman 40 |
| Block cutter 25 |
| Block printer 28 |
| Dyer 16 |
| Washers and unskilled labourers | 16 or 15 | 16 or 15 |

Fustian dyeing, 61 hours per week

| | Weekly wages (in s.) |
|---|---|
| Dressers 22 |
| Bleachers 18 |
| Dyers 16 |
| Finishers 22 |

The far most interesting part of the reports of Mr. Alexander Redgrave and Sir John Kincaid refers to the development and extension of co-operative societies for the erection and working of spinning mills in Lancashire and to a certain extent also in Yorkshire. These co-operative societies, which have multiplied since the passing of the Limited Liabilities Act, are generally composed of working men. Each society has a capital of £10,000 and upwards, divided into shares of £5 and £10; it has the power to borrow money in proportion to the subscribed capital, the borrowed funds consisting of small loans raised by factory operatives and persons of the same class. In Bury, for example, more than £300,000 will be required to set the co-operative spinning mills that have been or are being erected there in working order. In cotton spinning mills, the spinners and other persons employed there are frequently shareholders in the same mill; they work for wages and receive interest on their shares. In the cotton weaving sheds, the partners frequently hire looms and work at them. This offers an inducement to the workers, because no large capital is required to enable them to make a start on their own business. They buy the yarn ready for the loom, weave the cloth, and the manufacturing process is completed; or they receive the yarn from some manufacturer who deals with them, and return him the woven fabric. But this co-operative system is not confined to the spinning and weaving of cotton. It has spread to the trade in a variety of consumer goods, such as flour, groceries, cloth, etc.

The following report, made by Mr. Patrick, one of Sir John Kincaid’s sub-inspectors, contains some valuable information respecting the progress of this new system of factory ownership, which, however, I fear, will be put to a severe test at the next industrial crisis.

“16 May 1860

For about 12 years a co-operative society has existed in Rochdale under the name New Bacup and Wardle Commercial Company. It is a joint-stock company registered under the Joint Stock Companies Act with unlimited liability. It began business in Clough House Mill, Wardle, near Rochdale, with power to raise a capital of £100,000 in shares of £12 10s., of which £20,000 were paid up. It then increased it to £30,000 and, five years ago, built a large factory, Far Holme Mill, near Stackstead, with 100 horsepower steam-power in addition to the Clough House Mill, and in the half-year ending last October it paid a dividend of 44 per cent on the paid-up capital.” (Mr. Patrick reports on 11 June that the New Bacup and Wardle Commercial Company, under the name Far Holme Mill, Bacup, has just declared another dividend of 48 per cent on the paid-up capital.) “It has now increased its capital to the sum of £60,000 and has greatly extended its Far Holme Mill near Stackstead, requiring two new engines of 40 horsepower each, which are just being installed. The great majority of the shareholders are working men employed in the mill, but they receive wages as operatives and have nothing to do with the management beyond casting their votes at the annual election of the managing committee. I walked through Far Holme Mill this morning and can report that, as far as the Factory Acts are concerned, it is conducted no worse than any other in my district. Although I have not asked the parties the question, I believe they have borrowed money at 5 per cent interest.

There has existed in the neighbourhood of Bacup for about six years another society, which went under the name of the Rossendale Industrial Association.”

She built a factory, but, as was reported to me, did not get ahead, because it lacked sufficient working capital. This also was built on the cooperative system. The firm has now been converted into the Rossendale Industrial Company and is a company registered under the Limited Liabilities Act with the authorisation to raise a capital of £200,000. Shares of £10 each were issued for £4,000, and about £4,000 has been borrowed. These £4,000 were lent by small capitalists in amounts from £150 down to £10, without any security being given. When this cooperative society began, every shareholder was a worker. In addition to the Wear Mill, which is said to have been built by the Rossendale Industrial Association, it has now bought the Irwell Mills in Bacup from Messrs B. & T. Mum and now operates both.

The prosperity and success of the New Bacup and Wardle Commercial Company seem to have favoured the emergence of the new companies that have now been founded in my immediate vicinity and are setting up large factories for the conduct of their business. One is the New-Church Cotton Spinning and Weaving Company; it is registered under the Limited Liabilities Act and has the authority to raise £100,000 in shares of £10, of which £40,000 have already been paid up and £5,000 have been borrowed on mortgage at 5%. This company has already begun operations, having taken over an unused factory with 40 HP steam power, the Vale Mill in New-Church; in addition, it is building the Victoria Works, which will require an engine of 100 HP steam power. On completion, which will be in February of the coming year, the company hopes to employ 450 people.

Another company is the Rawtenstall Cotton Manufacturing Company, also with limited liability, with a nominal capital of £50,000 in shares of £5 and authorisation to borrow up to £10,000. About £20,000 have already been paid in, and it is erecting a factory at Hareholme which will require an engine with 70 HP steam power. I have been told that in both these companies nine-tenths of the shareholders come from the class of factory workers.

There is yet another cooperative society that has shot up during the last six months, namely the Old Clough Cotton Company. It bought from Messrs B. & T. Mum two old mills, the so-called Irwell Springs, and works on the same principle as the others; but as I could not go there today, I am not able to communicate all the details about it. The power, however, has been stated to me at 13 HP and the number of employed workers at 76, and I believe all the shareholders come from the class of factory workers.

There are also cases in which people rent a part of the factory, namely one or two rooms, or sometimes only part of a room. Although they work just like their workers, they are then masters of this part, employ workers like any factory owner and pay wages, without, however, giving the workers they employ a share in their enterprise. There were many more of these in Bacup formerly than today. Some have given it up, while others succeeded and either built factories themselves or rented large buildings. Of these there are more in Rochdale than in any other place in my district.

["New-York Daily Tribune" No. 6032, 24 August 1860]

II

London, 14 July 1860 After the résumé given in my last article on the factory reports of Sir John Kincaid and Mr Redgrave, I still have to deal with the report of Mr Robert Baker, the factory inspector for Ireland and for a part of Cheshire, Lancashire, Gloucestershire, Yorkshire, Staffordshire, Leicestershire, Herefordshire, Shropshire, Worcestershire and Warwickshire. The total number of accidents in Mr Baker’s district amounted to 601, of which fully 9% occurred to children, while 33% affected persons over 18 years of age. A more detailed analysis of these accidents reveals, firstly, that the ratio of accidents to the number of employed is greatest in those branches of industry where the machinery employed is subject to no legal control, and, secondly, that in textile factories where the same kind of machinery is used, most accidents occur in the largest spinning mills. With regard to the employment of the 198,565 workers belonging to Mr Baker’s district, he gives the following abstract for the last half-year:

Employed persons
Accidents caused by machinery

In cotton spinning mills 107,106 1 in 261
In woollen spinning mills 14,982 1 in 348
In flax spinning mills 33,918 1 in 389
In silk spinning mills 33,874 1 in 2,251
In worsted spinning mills 2,896 1 in 424
In other factories 5,789 none

In all these textile factories the machinery is guarded, i.e. provided with such devices for the safety of the workers as are required by the sanitary clauses of the Factory Acts. If we now turn, e.g., to Nottingham, where a great number of people, especially children, work at machinery which, as the law requires, is not guarded, we shall find that in the year 1859 there were recorded in the books of the General Hospital 1,500 accidents and in those of the dispensary 794 accidents, making a total of 2,294 persons—based on a number of employed taken as not more than 62,583. This yields an accident rate within the parliamentary borough of Nottingham of 1 in 27, a ratio in comparison with which the accidents in the textile factories provided with safety devices appear almost insignificant. In Birmingham, on the other hand, where one finds occupations of every kind, both with and without connection with steam power, where there are only two small textile factories and where in general there is no compulsion for safety measures on the machinery at which the young workers are employed, the ratio of accidents to the number of employed was 1 in 34. The great advantage conferred by the sanitary clauses of the Factory Acts and the more general regulations under these provisions is also shown by a comparison of all the accidents reported to the inspectors for the half-years ending 31 October 1845 and 30 April 1846 with those up to October and April 1858 and 1859. In the latter period the general reduction of accidents amounted to 29%, although the number of workers, at the lowest estimate, had increased by 20%.

As regards the distribution of accidents among larger and smaller factories, I consider the following facts adduced by Mr Baker to be decisive: During the last half-year, in the 758 cotton factories of his district, where 107,000 persons are employed, all the accidents that occurred happened in 167 factories employing about 40,000 persons, so that in 591 factories employing 67,000 persons there were no accidents at all. Similarly, in 387 smaller spinning mills all the accidents occurred in 28 of them; in the 153 flax spinning mills all the accidents occurred in 45 mills, and in 774 silk factories all the accidents happened in 14, so that in a large part of each branch of work there were no accidents by machinery, and in every branch the majority of the accidents occurred in the largest factories. Mr Baker seeks to explain this latter phenomenon by two causes: namely, that in the largest factories the transition from old, unguarded to new machinery takes place relatively sluggishly and gradually, and, secondly, that in these larger factories the concentration of labour-power increases as rapidly as the responsible control exercised over such establishments slackens.

“These two causes,” says Mr Baker, “operate very strongly in the production of accidents. In the first, the old machinery still existing, which has never been guarded and in which many unguarded wheels still remain, is all the more calamitous precisely because the safety of the new machinery causes the danger from the old that remains to be forgotten; in the latter cause, however, the constant struggle for every minute, in which the work is propelled by an unvarying force estimated at about a thousand horse-power, necessarily leads to dangers. In such factories moments are the elements of profit—everyone’s attention is demanded at every instant. Here, to borrow a maxim of Liebig’s, one can observe a constant struggle between life and inorganic forces, where the mental powers direct and the animal powers must move and adapt themselves to the rotations of the spindles. They must not slow down, despite the exertion demanded of them, whether through excessive strain or heat; nor may they interrupt the work for a moment, nor direct their attention to other things surrounding them, for in every delay lies loss. So it comes about that fingers are laid upon wheels which are considered safe, either on account of their position or the slowness of their motion, when the attention is wrongly directed elsewhere. So it comes about that workers who are hurrying to produce a certain number of pounds of yarn within a given time forget to look under their machine for their little ‘piecers’ <‘thread-knotters’>. Many accidents thus occur on account of what is called their own carelessness.”

During the last half-year all the textile factories, except the silk factories, in Ireland and in Mr Baker’s English districts were very profitable. The only obstacle that seems to have kept the various branches of industry within bounds was the increasing scarcity of raw material. In the cotton trade the erection of new spinning mills, the development of new systems of expansion, and the demand for labour-power were never surpassed in earlier times. Nothing was more striking than the new measures serving the search for raw material. Thus, in imitation of the Lancashire Cotton Supply Association, a Flax Supply Association has been founded in Belfast. While in the five years up to and including 1853 the average import of flax plus the flax harvest of Ireland amounted to 113,409 tons annually, in the last five years, including 1858, it amounted to only 101,672 tons, which equals a decrease of 12,000 tons a year, with an increased annual export value of £1,000,000. The price of wool, which already stood above the average during the period covered by the last factory reports, has risen uninterruptedly ever since. The rapid expansion of woollen manufacture and the increased demand for mutton both in Great Britain and in the colonies can be regarded as permanent causes of this rise in wool prices. As an accidental cause threatening to reduce the usual supply of wool, the special character of the season may be considered; many sheep have perished in the winter on account of bad or unsuitable fodder, and many lambs have died during the spring in consequence of cold, lack of food, and a disease which led to death in a few hours.

The only industry that has been seriously hampered during the last six months as a result of the conclusion of the Anglo-French commercial treaty and the apprehensions about the effects of foreign competition is silk manufacture. The pressure thereby exerted gradually increased, so that at the moment when I am writing this article, more than 13,000 weavers in Coventry alone are out of employment, because all the looms are standing idle. This crisis is all the more deplorable because in Coventry – as I noted in an article on the factory reports – a number of cottage silk factories had sprung up, in which the workers employed their own families, with a few hired labourers here and there. These silk factories had increased considerably in number since the beginning of 1860. They are in fact a return of the former domestic manufacturers, only with the addition of steam power, but quite different from the new co-operative system of Lancashire and Yorkshire. In them, the householder is at once the master and the weaver and the lessee of the steam power; sometimes he is also the bread-master for his family and for other labourers. He has either bought his two looms outright or taken them on credit and pays so much weekly for them; or he has leased them, probably from his landlord, who is a builder and speculator. He also leases the requisite steam power. It is said that today the difference between the labour performed on the weaver's loom in this way and the labour of the master is as great as that, say, between French and English silk ribbon. It is, however, to be foreseen, and Mr Robert Baker seems to share this supposition in his report, that this domestic labour, combined with the application of mechanical power, will not be able to withstand commercial shocks. In all probability, the English manufacturer, in order to cope with his French rival, will be forced to return to the investment of capital on a large scale, which will destroy the cottage silk factories that compete with him right before his own threshold.