XPost: soc.history, soc.genealogy.britain
From: goddai01@hotmail.co.uk
On 27/09/17 02:19, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 16:46:29 +0100, "Richard Chambers"
> wrote:
>
>> Following the invention of Cartwright's power loom in 1785, the income of
>> home-based handloom weavers slowly but continuously declined, from about 20
>> shillings a week in 1785 to as low as 4 or 5 shillings a week in 1840. By
>> this time, they were in abject poverty, attempting to live on earnings that
>> would not even supply sufficient food.
>>
>> If Adam Smith's theory in "The Wealth of Nations" is correct, the handloom
>> weavers in such poverty ought to have left their trade and found alternative
>> employment, on a much shorter time-scale than 55 years.
>>
>> My questions are:-
>> 1. Why did they not leave the trade?
>> 2. Were they trapped by loans, initially taken out to pay for their
>> expensive handlooms, which they became unable to repay as their earnings
>> declined? (They would also be unable to re-sell their useless looms in order
>> to pay off their loans, because there would be no buyers).
>> 3. Were there other reasons that I have not thought of, that would explain
>> their failure to leave the trade and find other work?
%><
>
> Interesting questions.
>
> I had some family members who were handloom weavers, including my
> great great grandfather, who lived in Ayrshire in Scotland. He
> committed suicide, and what you have written above may throw light on
> that.
I also have a 2xggfather who committed suicide in the 1840s (in the
Holme Valley which may be of interest to the OP). Nevertheless his son
who remained in England was still shown as a clothier in the 1871
census. (3 other sons are known to have emigrated in the 1840s & 50s and
the other went missing, presumed emigrated, in the 50s). I haven't
researched this but I suspect the suicide and emigration might be linked
to general trading conditions rather than being specific to the domestic
industry.
I think one explanation is that different fabrics had different
characteristics. I believe the power looms were initially used for
worsteds and woollens remained the province of the domestic industry.
I don't know how long the woollen trade lasted. A few days ago I went
to a talk about a local (Holmfirth) photographic firm founded in 1917 -
in an old weaving shed in the photographer's father's property. The
implication is that some such sheds remained in use for weaving into the
early C20th although I've seen no other indications of this.
One factor affecting the longevity of the domestic system is that it
could be combined with other trades such as farming. In 1861 my
ggfather was shown as a farmer, in 1881 he'd moved into quarrying and
employed over 20 men and boys but in 1891 he'd left the quarrying
business with his two sons and gone back to being a farmer.
This branch of the family also casts some light on the financing of the
early mills. The 2xggfather was the youngest of several sons. His two
eldest brothers inherited the main family property, again half farming,
half textiles including a dye house. One of them sold his half to the
other and went off into to be a shop-keeper. The other subsequently
sold up and put the money into a mill. Some of this is in
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Wool-Worsit-History-Textiles-Valley/dp/
957630603/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1506498276&sr=8-1&keywords=wool+and+worsit
which I recommend to the OP. The account of the Beardsells may also
cast light on the transition from the domestic to the factory industry
(the Amon Dearnley to whom they supplied yarn was, BTW, related to them
several times over by marriage & cousinage - he's one of the most
complicated bits of my ancestry).
--
Hotmail is my spam bin. Real address is ianng
at austonley org uk
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
