Will Britain Make it? E-Book

Richard Morris

• Herausgeber: The History Press
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2022

Beschreibung

British industry isn't dead. Yet. ICI was Britain's biggest manufacturer and exporter, while GEC was its biggest employer and Morris Motors made over half of its cars; Courtaulds dominated global cloth production and produced the first man-made fibres; BSA was the world's biggest producer of motorbikes; De Havilland produced groundbreaking aeroplanes and some of the world's first jet engines. And yet, these companies have all collapsed, taking with them nearly 200 years of industrial pre-eminence. British industry is dead, killed off by 'Made in China' stickers and US market dominance. Or is it? Will Britain Make It? explores the rise, fall and future of British industry and all the complexities surrounding it. Who's to blame for its slow decline? What about Brexit? Can it be resurrected? If you've ever asked any of these questions, then this is the book for you.

Leseprobe

Jacket illustration: Old BP fuel sign, Norfolk (Eric Farrelly/Alamy)

First published 2022

The History Press

97 St George’s Place, Cheltenham,

Gloucestershire, GL50 3QB

www.thehistorypress.co.uk

© Richard Morris, 2022

The right of Richard Morris to be identified as the Author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without the permission in writing from the Publishers.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data.

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

ISBN 978 1 8039 9223 5

Typesetting and origination by The History Press

Printed and bound in Great Britain by TJ Books Limited, Padstow, Cornwall.

eBook converted by Geethik Technologies

Contents

Introduction

Part One: Industrialisation and Growth

1 The First Industrial Revolution

2 The Second and Third Industrial Revolutions

Part Two: Britain’s Leading Companies

3 Courtaulds

4 W.G. Armstrong & Co.

5 Vickers Ltd

6 Birmingham Small Arms

7 The General Electric Company

8 Morris Motors Ltd

9 De Havilland Aircraft Co. Ltd

10 Imperial Chemical Industries

11 International Computers Ltd

Part Three: Britain’s Industrial Decline and Future

12 Looking Back

13 Does it Really Matter?

14 Where is Britain Now?

15 Britain’s Industrial Future

16 Brexit

17 Will Britain Make it?

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Sources of Further Information

References

Bibliography

Introduction

About the Book

For a lot of people it seems as though engineering and manufacturing in Great Britain ended about twenty years ago with the belief that all production shifted to China. There seems to have been a collective British shrug about this, as if there was an inevitability to it as low-cost Asian economies started to develop but, never mind, the creative, financial and service sectors have risen to fill the gap. Recent years have indeed witnessed a quite remarkable collapse of British industry and with it some of the country’s biggest and best-known companies. However, it is not true that low-cost economies were solely to blame for this demise and many of the great names of British business ceased to exist in their recognised form long before the exodus of manufacturing overseas. Britain’s collapse from Industrial Revolution pioneer and leader to industrial also-ran was due to a heady mix that included myopia, duplicity and stupidity. You only have to look at the health of industry in Germany – a nation devastated by the Second World War – to see what could have been avoided and what should have been possible. Nor is it true that the rise of Britain’s service sector will compensate for the loss of its industrial base, making this collapse a national tragedy even if the British can’t quite acknowledge it. It would be possible to write about this collapse and its effects using pure statistics, but this seems a rather dry approach. This book instead simply provides some initial political and economic context in Chapters 1 and 2. For simplicity, I’ve generally referred to ‘Britain’ rather than the ‘United Kingdom’. The United Kingdom, or UK, would be the more correct as it includes Northern Ireland, whereas Britain refers only to England, Scotland and Wales, but ‘Britain’ is I think how most overseas readers recognise the national identity. It’s also easier to write about ‘Britons’ and the ‘British’ rather than ‘United Kingdomers’ or the ‘United Kingdomish’. Please also note that I’ve deliberately tried not to riddle the book with academic footnotes and references, or frequent deferment to ‘ibid.’, simply to make it more readable but would refer you instead to the sources listed in the bibliography.

From Chapter 3 onwards, the book views the industrial decline from the inside, from the perspective of what were some of Britain’s – and the world’s – greatest companies. These chapters tell the stories of how these companies started, how they became great and seeks to understand why they failed and what happened to their business subsequently. The stories are compelling because many started from quite humble beginnings and went on to achieve greatness only to fail, and fail quickly, from positions that seemed invincible. If you think I have got these corporate facts wrong then I apologise. There are many sources of information about the histories of the companies and these are often conflicting. It’s also difficult to encapsulate so much information in the shorter summaries that are provided here. For example, the government decision to invest or not in the ailing British motorbike industry involved several different departments, several potential funding policies and schemes, political divides, manifesto promises, election intrigues and multiple political personalities. In the book this is encapsulated in one short sentence (see p.88). Getting the history and nuance right in a few words across such a depth of material is challenging and inevitably different interpretations and opinions will be apparent. There are many books that do go into companies more deeply than I’ve been able to here and I would encourage you to investigate these more detailed company biographies. I am certainly indebted to the authors of these books, whose research I have drawn on extensively and whose passion for our cultural heritage leaves me much indebted and with much admiration. (And if you want a fuller understanding of the motorbike investment saga, Jock Bruce-Gardyne’s 1978 book Meriden:Odyssey of a Lame Duck would be a good place to start.)

The majority of the companies looked at are or were involved in manufacturing, which is simply because this is the nature of business that arose out of the crucible of the Industrial Revolution and the power of Victorian industrial engineering that made Britain the ‘workshop of the world’. Younger readers may be surprised at just how great these British companies were. The company names may provide a degree of nostalgia for older generations, who will remember them and who may well have worked for them, coupled with a gnashing of teeth at the passing of so many great British institutions. Chapters 12 and 13 may fuel that sadness, looking more holistically at the corporate and government mistakes that were made alongside the effects of the collapse. Despite these corporate losses, I hope that the biographies will yet be inspirational, with Chapter 14 looking at the things that were achieved, and at the surprising legacies that have been passed on.

I hope that this uniquely macro and micro look at British industry will give insights into the industrial past, and the future. Are the legacies and lessons learned enough to see Britain maintain an industrial presence? My views on whether Britain will ‘make’ it will need to be read in the final chapters. I hope that for readers – including those in business, as well as scholars and politicians – my collective analysis and overview for the future are thought-provoking. If you think I’ve got the analysis and predictions wrong then note that these are just my opinions. This is a book about lessons learned, however, rather than blame. I hope, too, you will forgive any factual errors made. The problem with writing about corporate ownerships, subsidiaries and business dynamics is that they are subject to such rapid change, and these changed even during the course of writing. The facts, therefore, were as accurate as I could make them at the time, which was prior to the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic.

About the Companies in the Book

There are some outstanding British inventors in British history, developing ideas that transformed this small, agricultural and wool-producing nation into an engineering powerhouse. Remarkably, there are some businesses that have survived from this era through to today, including Richard Carter Ltd, GB Kent & Sons Ltd, Jaques of London, Dudson Ltd and Ormiston Wire, which date back to the 1700s. Britain’s oldest manufacturing company, the Whitechapel Bell Foundry, operated for nearly 450 years before closing in 2017.

For many pioneering names of the First Industrial Revolution, however, making a profit would prove to be more difficult than being inventive. James Hargreaves was embattled with industrial disputes, John Kay and Richard Arkwright would die as poor men, and even the great Victorian engineers of Brunel, Bessemer and Telford would not die as rich men. In most cases, successful early pioneers were themselves simply surpassed by new ideas, new ventures and new businesses in a process described in 1942 by the Austrian political economist Joseph Schumpeter as ‘Creative Destruction’. The steam engine company founded by James Watt and his business partner Matthew Boulton, for example, operated with great success from 1775 but it was still out-produced by Newcomen’s less efficient but cheaper engine and plagued with court cases from rival engineers. It would eventually be taken over in 1895 by the Avery Weighing Company to make scales instead of steam engines. Abraham Darby and his descendants operated their groundbreaking iron-making business for over two centuries before also closing in 2017. Darby’s Coalbrookdale forge, however, had always had an erratic business life and its glory days were long since gone.

This book is intent on the study of companies whose flame burned brightest with visible impacts on today’s society. It starts by looking at companies that did start life right at the very beginnings of the Industrial Revolution and which do have a story to tell right up to the present time. Courtaulds was established in 1794 and epitomises the story of the nation’s industrial growth through textiles. Iron-makers Vickers was founded in 1828 and the machinery expert company founded by William Armstrong in 1847 were both at the start and very peak of Britain’s First Industrial Revolution.

Other companies selected for examination are drawn mostly from the next generation of entrepreneurs and engineers who rose up through the eruption of new technologies and practices known as the Second and Third Industrial Revolutions. There are many British companies from this era with once great and familiar names that could be looked at: APV Ltd, Birmingham Battery and Metal Company, Bluebird Toys, Ever Ready, British Seagull, BTR Plc, Charles Churchill & Co., Crompton Parkinson, Dunlop Rubber, Ekco, Gerard Bros, Gillett & Johnston, Goblin Vacuum Cleaners, Greenwood & Batley, John Hetherington & Sons, Lucas Industries, Marshall, Sons & Co., Minimax Ltd, Muir-Hill, Murphy Radio, Northern Counties, Parnall & Sons, Patent Shaft, Plessey, Ransomes & Rapier, Silk Engineering, J.W. Spear, Strebor, Turner & Newell, Westclox and Yale & Valor.

Companies selected were considered to be ‘successful’, although defining ‘success’ can be a tricky business. If success is all about profit, then the value of money and profit can be equally problematic, particularly where values are compared over long periods of time. To say a company made a profit of £1 does not, of course, sound much today. Was it worth a lot 200 years ago? You could use a cost comparison, but it is difficult to say that £1 in 1800 would be equivalent to buying a car today – what sort of car (and, of course, you would not have been able to buy a car in 1800). Most representations of cost tend to look at the yearly increase on historical value through inflation as indicated by rises in the Retail Price Index (RPI), but the RPI has been a basket of ever-changing commodities and there are so many other factors that can influence the value such as income, availability and standards of living. A better estimate might not just look at RPI but also at Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and average earnings, although this approach tends to produce a wide range of possible values. For example, £1 in 1800 (noting that this would be in pre-metric imperial currency) might now be worth anywhere between £75 and £6,000. The lower value might represent the historical opportunity cost whereas the economic cost equivalent might be towards the higher value end.1 Either way, just looking at the returns a company has made is not ideal for selection as criteria of success. Success has therefore been estimated subjectively in other ways using elements such as longevity, innovation, achievement and legacy. From this perspective, companies selected for examination from this period in time include Birmingham Small Arms, Morris Motors, the de Havilland Aircraft Company Ltd and International Computers Ltd.

For more recent companies still, businesses listed as public companies with tradeable share ownership, then the share values might be used as indicators of success. From 1935 onwards, business and finance professionals could look at the country’s top-performing industrial and commercial sector companies via a new ratings table; the Financial News index, the oldest continuous share index in the UK and one of the oldest in the world. The index looked at the top thirty companies in the country and was originally known as the ‘Financial News 30-share index’ (FT 30). The Finance News merged with the Financial Times in 1945 and remained the barometer of investor sentiment until the FT Actuaries series was launched in 1962 followed by the Financial Times Share Index in 1984, known as the ‘FTSE’ or ‘Footsie’ (noting, of course, that the Financial Times itself, founded in 1888, is now owned by the Japanese company Nikkei). The FTSE now looks at the top 100, top 250, and all share companies, and is different to the original Financial News 30 index because it includes in its considerations market capitalisation (i.e. share value multiplied by the number of shares available). This means the FTSE 100 is more relevant to company size. It also means it is much more changeable than the FT 30 as companies shrink and grow in natural business cycles. Both indices, however, are indicative of the nature and value placed on leading UK-orientated companies.

For the FT 30, the original companies listed in 1935 are predominantly of an engineering or production nature: Associated Portland Cement, Austin Motors, Bass, Bolsover Colliery, Callenders Cables & Construction, J. & P. Coats, Courtaulds, Distillers, Dorman Long, Dunlop Rubber, Electrical & Musical Industries, Fine Spinners and Doublers, General Electric, Guest Keen & Nettlefolds, Harrods, Hawker Siddeley, Imperial Chemical Industries, Imperial Tobacco, International Tea Co. Stores, London Brick, Murex, Patons & Baldwins, Pincham Johnson & Associates, Rolls-Royce, Tate & Lyle, Turner & Newall, United Steel, Vickers, Watney Combe & Reid and F.W. Woolworth. From this esteemed FT 30 list, the General Electric Company and Imperial Chemical Industries are included in the company biographies that follow.

The companies chosen to have their stories told in the book have not therefore been selected through a particularly detailed analysis or model of financial success but have been chosen instead as being ‘great’, iconic British industrial companies spread over a period of time and embedded within British culture and the British economic and political landscape. Together they also represent a cross section of industrial sectors including textiles, iron-making, mechanical equipment, electrical equipment, armaments, transport and computing. Throughout the book, I’ve deferred to shortened versions of company names, a Midland and industrial custom that aids readability. Morris Motors, for example, is simply referred to as ‘Morris’, and Imperial Chemical Industrial by its acronym ‘ICI’.

Acknowledgements

My thanks for their help and support to Amy Rigg at The History Press, Helen Jordan at BAE Heritage and the staff at Haywards Heath Library. Thanks also to the motivation from friends and colleagues interested in industry, history and Britain: Mark Milne, Tony Jacques, Andy Dunican and Mike Farmer. Especial thanks for the encouragement of Douglas, Sue, Barney and Seb Morris.

Part One

Industrialisation and Growth

1

The First Industrial Revolution

The Enlightenment

Seventeenth-century Britain was a troubled place. At the turn of the century, King James I of England had succeeded Queen Elizabeth I, but he was never likely to match the success of her long and mostly popular reign. The attempt on his life via the gunpowder plot of 1605 emphasised the religious disharmony that wreaked havoc throughout the land during his time. Both James I and his son Charles I also argued bitterly with the nation over the rights of kings to rule divinely, resulting in two bloody civil wars that tore the country apart and which ended particularly badly for Charles. There was also strife overseas with interminable European squabbling and trouble at home through the arrival of gin- and alcohol-infused depredation, compounded by plague, freak weather and the destruction of 13,000 houses in the Great Fire that swept the country’s capital in 1666. Imagine an event today destroying nearly 90 per cent of homes in the capital city.

Eighteenth-century Britain was not without its troubles either. There was more overseas fighting with battles against France, Austria, Prussia, India and the states of America. There was more infighting too, notably this time with the Jacobite rebellions and recriminations over slave trading, and massive financial losses and instability arising from the ‘South Sea Bubble’ economic disaster. There was, however, a significant difference between seventeenth- and eighteen-century Britain through a series of underlying developments that would transform a relatively small and mediocre nation into a worldwide powerhouse.

One of these developments was the thirst for knowledge that would come to see the period labelled as the ‘Age of Reason’ or more simply, the ‘Enlightenment’. The rediscovery of ancient scripts and knowledge is often cited as a reason for the new-found interest in learning during this period, a development of the earlier Renaissance period. There were other reasons too, however, including a movement towards questioning political and religious dogma, facilitated in some ways by the earlier civil war that had questioned the right to rule. Religious texts such as the Bible were wrested away by Lutherism from the Latin of the clergy to the language of English that everyday folk could read. Natural philosophy, or the study of nature, began to make inroads into quackery and superstition from which developed the evidence and analytics-based practice of science. Gresham College in London began to apply mathematics and science to shipbuilding and navigation, raising the standard of maritime Britain. In 1867, Isaac Newton’s Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy (the Principia Mathematica) began to see some clear growth in the stature of British science. As Voltaire would exclaim to the Académi Française, ‘We are all his disciples now.’

Such learning was only made wholly tacit by its transference across the nation’s population rather than keeping it secure within academic cloisters. Clubs and learning groups grew, such as the ‘Lunar Men’ or the ‘Invisible College’, which included Christopher Wren and Robert Boyle and which would in time evolve into learned bodies such as the Geographic Society and the Royal Society. These societies took away the hidden, secret knowledge of artisans and trade societies and made them public and shared, written in everyday language that had hitherto been smothered by academic prose and jargon. Better medicinal practice also allowed people more time to pursue exploits and learning beyond mere existence. Museums started to appear, including the first British Museum founded by Sir Hans Sloane in 1753. People were also only too willing to share their new knowledge and demonstrate their development and thinking. Networking in coffee houses grew, with 551 such houses in London in 1734, five times as many as had been present seventy years previously.

The growing effect of the printing press also had a key role to play in the spread of knowledge through pamphlets, newspapers and magazines. Newspaper sales rose from 2.5 million in 1710 to 16 million a century later and the roots of The Times would make its first appearance in 1785. Popular learned books began to appear for the first time, including Doctor Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language in 1755 and the Encyclopaedia Britannica of Denis Diderot in 1768, while the polymath Joseph Priestley published over 150 science-based books. Six thousand books were produced in 1620 and this had risen to 56,000 in the 1790s, with the number of publishers outside London growing from none before 1710 to over 1,000 eighty years later. One of the world’s oldest magazines, The Spectator, was started by Richard Steel and Joseph Addison in 1828.

The Enlightenment had a more profound effect, though, than just better informing and educating the populace. It led to a new breed of society, the middle class, sweeping away the medieval aristocracy and peasant boundaries. It also led to the challenging of societal and philosophic norms, generating a new culture of trust, hopeful virtue and a ‘new world vision’. The 1700s became a period of radicals and parliamentary reformers. Thinkers and philosophers such as William Cobbet, Jonathan Swift, William Hazlitt and Thomas Malthus challenged the nation’s rules and values. Immanuel Kant’s essay on the role of government and free thinking, for example, became a worldwide bestseller, while campaigners such as Thomas Paine began to challenge the rights to rule of the incumbent autocracies. Instead they preferred to set forth the rights of individuals and laid the foundations of democracy, most notably in the United States but across Europe too, where it was epitomised by the French Revolution.

Britain’s Leading Industry: Textiles

It was enlightenment in agriculture, and an Agricultural Revolution, that played a key initial role in the change of the nation’s industrial fortunes, a revolution denoted by a procession of agricultural improvements from the Middle Ages onwards. Charles Townsend, the 2nd Viscount Townsend or popularly known as ‘Turnip Townsend’, popularised the use of turnips to enhance agricultural production in Britain. The deep roots of a turnip extract unused minerals from a field usually left fallow as part of a three-field crop rotation system, while growing clover enriched the soil in fallow fields for better production in the next year. Henceforth, 33 per cent of land usually left unused each year to recover could from now on be used for crop production. In 1700 Jethro Tull invented the horse-drawn seed drill to economically sow seeds in this new farming landscape, which alongside plough improvements, fertiliser development and the enclosure of common land all served to make farming more efficient. These changes increased the food supply and enabled population growth from 5.5 million in 1700 to 9 million by 1801. The population of Surrey alone then increased again by 65 per cent in the first three decades of the 1800s. This population growth provided a new labour force and, alongside improved roads and canals in a country that, unusually, developed toll- and tariff-free trade, enabled an increasingly large, coherent market to develop. These changes also benefitted Britain’s main industrial business: textiles.

Over the course of time, the British Isles have coalesced, sunk and risen, and travelled to different geographic positions over the earth’s surface, accumulating a rich tapestry of minerals and geological features. It has been rich in tin, lead, iron and coal, for example, which have all been used to good effect in industry. It is, however, the wet and green British environment that has made the country the ideal place to nurture sheep and process wool. Wool is an ideal clothing material. It is easily fashioned, easily washed, keeps wearers cool in summer and warm in winter and warmer than vegetable-based fibres such as hemp or cotton (or even many of today’s synthetics). It is therefore desirable at both home and overseas, and wool has therefore formed the staple of British industry throughout the past two millennia. Up to the sixteenth century, every parish throughout the land had a thriving wool industry. That industry was based on wool production and processing producing long chains of wool thread known as yarn. It was, however, Flemish weavers in particular who were more adept at weaving and knitting yarn into high-value woollen cloth, from which clothing was made. The Englishman William Cockayne had tried to add value to British-made cloth with a monopoly agreement to sell dyed and dressed wool abroad in the early seventeenth century but this failed and depressed the cloth trade for centuries. The one bright spot was the development of a lighter wool mix cloth that sold well to hotter, south European countries (paving the way for a more cordial relationship with Spain following the Armada invasion attempt of 1588).

The changes to Britain’s traditional three-field rotation system not only changed human lives; it changed animal’s lives too. It provided more winter fodder for an increasing number of farm animals, reducing the number of open-grazed sheep and increasing the number of farmyard-processed sheep. These different sheep grazed in different ways and fed on different food, and when raised through selective breeding by a process pioneered by Robert Bakewell, led to a change in the wool types available. British weavers were able to make smoother and silkier high-value wool products known as worsteds. Any idea that this was a pastoral industry with kindly shepherds passing tufts of wool on to gentle cottage weavers as per a Gainsborough or Constable painting would be very wrong. The wool and worsted industry was highly fractionalised, with regions competing with each other and with overseas countries to produce better and more innovative products more cheaply. Challis, felt, tweed, melton, loden, jersey, bustian, calimanco, camlet, cantillon, grogram, harrateen, mockado, prunella, sagathis, sateen, shalloon and serge are just some of the many hundreds of wool and woollen types (including the use of recycled wool known as ‘shoddy’, which is still known to us today as indicative of less than top-quality goods). British innovation in finer wools, dyestuffs and wool processing enabled the country to claim its place in the world as best in both the production of wool and the creation of woollens. By 1750, over 50 per cent of all British wool products were exported, and this accounted for around half of all British exports.1 It was also the first British product to have an export charge attached to it, and likely to be the reason that smugglers evolved with the nickname ‘owlers’ derived from their trade in wool long before their association with tea, rum and brandy.

For thousands of years the weaving of cloth had been achieved by hanging threads vertically (the warp) from a high support and weighted at the bottom with loom weights. Through these vertical threads, a horizontal thread (the weft) would be passed in and out and backwards and forwards (the weave). Somebody clever but unknown in the mists of time had used two top bars to alternatively attach the vertical threads, allowing them all to be moved back and forth for the easier passage of the horizontal weft thread. Wool processing, particularly for fine wool and worsteds, was, however, still a slow, highly skilled and labour-intensive process, with around one in ten of the population working in the wool industry. It was the intensity of competition and concentration of labour that led producers to try and make efficiency savings, which in turn led to the explosion in equipment and operations that wrested cloth production away from Europe and into Britain, and would come to be known as the Industrial Revolution. In 1733, for example, the son of an English farmer called John Kay invented the flying shuttle, a wooden torpedo-shaped device that used wheels to carry the weft through the warp. Rather than being passed through by one weaver to another, it was propelled through the warp by flicking long leather straps at either end. This strap configuration meant that wider looms could be built, producing wider cloth (which would in time allow furniture makers to start to produce settees and sofas instead of armchairs) while doing this at a much faster rate. If the flying shuttle was twice as fast, and twice as wide, production would have quadrupled overnight, but it had the added advantage of enabling weaving machines to be operated by one person instead of two! Imagine companies today increasing their working practices eightfold overnight.

Cloth production in Britain was revolutionised, and if there was a drawback, it was that the suppliers of woollen thread and yarn needed by the weavers to make cloth could hardly keep up. Yarn production was the original cottage industry with spinners working at home producing wool on their spinning wheels – but they couldn’t spin faster than they already did to match the new demand. The solution came via another innovation, the invention of the spinning jenny in 1764 by an illiterate weaver named James Hargreaves. Illiterate he may have been, but he had the insight and the ability to build a machine that could feed a number of spindles from one larger spinning wheel rather than one at a time. Unlike a traditional spinning wheel, the jenny also had a powered wheel that freed up the hands of the operators so that they could spin twice as fast. Richard Arkwright then took the process a step further in 1768. His invention of the water frame took Kay’s and Hargreaves’s designs to a higher level, with a bigger, more powerful and more automated weaving machine that needed to be powered by a water wheel in order to operate. Arkwright organised his production into a more factory-like mill. Once again production was revolutionised and textile mills would come to account for 40 per cent of Britain’s exports.2

Power

Special-purpose machinery was one of the fundamentals of industrialisation, and through the ideas of Kay, Arkwright and Hargreaves it had now started to appear. The development of Britain’s mill machinery brought with it demands for more power and this was in short supply. The predominant source of contemporary power was through water wheels, like the one still working today in the Styal Mill at the National Trust’s Quarry Bank museum. The problem with water power is the uncertain flow of water driving it, often reduced or non-existent in summer, with the alternatives of wind or animal power being equally erratic. Enter now James Watt, a Scottish instrument maker working at the University of Glasgow trying to fix a small Newcomen engine. The Newcomen engine works by using steam power to lift a piston in a cylinder but it had to wait for the steam to condense in the cylinder before gravity returned the piston back to its starting position (essentially an atmospheric, rather than a true, fully steam-powered engine). Watt realised that the small model he was working on would not work properly because the ratio of the surface area to volume in this small model was different to that of larger Newcomen engines. Effectively it had less surface area so it was not able to radiate heat away as quickly, taking it longer to heat up and cool down and rendering it ineffective. He then realised through a moment of genius that the engine would work better if the whole cooling cycle was not actually taking place in the cylinder, and added a separate condensing cylinder. He then arranged for steam to be fed to the main drive cylinder not just at the bottom but alternatively via the top and bottom of the main cylinder, enabling steam pressure to drive the piston both up and down. By 1769 Watt had hence designed the world’s first, true steam engine. What was needed now was a cheap material that enabled strength and accuracy in construction for steam engines to be reliable and affordable, and that material was developed by Abraham Darby.

Cast Iron

The ‘makers and creators’ of Britain engaged wholeheartedly in the heady mix of learning, exploration and optimism of the Enlightenment. Pivotal to their story is the work of a small-time farmer and locksmith called Abraham Darby. Darby wanted to make large quantities of high-quality cast iron, which would have been a strange thing to want to do at that time. If you had wanted a small metal object, such as a farm tool like shears or a household object like a candle holder, you turned to the blacksmith, who would form them in his forge as ‘wrought’ iron. Wrought is the word used to describe the process of hammering and pounding hot molten iron to remove its impurities, leaving an iron with a low carbon content and making it both strong (resistant to deformation) and tough (resistant to breaking). Wrought iron was, however, of limited use in making large metal objects such as statues or cannon, which needed to be made by casting molten metal into moulds. The English gunsmith John Browne had proven that cast iron could be used for naval cannon but it was a costly and specialised process that required cannon to be annealed (heated and cooled at controlled temperatures) to give them wrought-like qualities. Bronze or brass, however, could be made liquid at lower temperatures than iron, and cast in thinner sections than iron, making it cheaper, lighter and more useful for large metal objects. Hence, iron was good for small, wrought items and bronze for large cast items, and there was no real reason why anyone would have wanted to change this status quo.

Abraham Darby thought otherwise and spent time and money on experiments, drawing on the experiences of his forbears and from his own familiarities working in the brewing industry, where coke – a type of high-carbon coal with fewer impurities – was used as a fuel in the brewing process. It would be this that would give him the breakthrough. By 1709 he had found that coke reduced the sulphur contamination of iron to produce a much higher-quality and purer metal that he could pour more easily into sand moulds to produce thin wall castings of good enough quality to be able to cast it in large volumes. Darby’s work had profound effects. For a millennia since the Pax Romana, the centre of British industry had been in Sussex and the south of England, where thick Downland clay produced excellent bricks and tiles and Wealden oak provided the timber for ships, houses, furniture and for making charcoal used to smelt bronze and iron. Sussex was hence the world leader in cannon production and they had been used, for example, by the British navy against the Spanish Armada (who were also coincidentally armed with British cannon!). Darby’s discovery moved the centre of British industry away from the wooded, charcoal areas of southern England into the coal- and coke-seamed areas of the Midlands and the North. His grandson, Abraham Darby III, built the world’s first iron bridge in 1779, demonstrating the capabilities of cast iron. They would now supply a new material as the basis for either forge or large-scale casting work, which would become an ideal material for a whole host of other innovators who were emerging. Nobody would come to better demonstrate this than the great engineers Isambard Kingdom Brunel and Thomas Telford, whose innovations in suspension bridges, railways and ships would in due course stun the world and enable British-made goods to be transported internationally. Often overlooked in the role of this infrastructure revolution is the development of improved cement by James Parker (hydraulic, 1796) and William Aspdin (Portland, 1843).3

Britain Industrialises

Cast iron, however, was not limited to innovation in transport; it came to play a key part in the machinery and equipment that developed Britain’s industry, aided by the superior manufacturing techniques established by the likes of Joseph Whitworth and John Wilkinson (whose accurate boring process enabled the cylinders for Watt’s steam engines). The increasing ability to mechanise the reciprocating and linear motion machines and processes using power from fire and steam provided the platform for the Industrial Revolution and future British economic power. A new breed of entrepreneurial society and culture grasped the opportunities presented and energised the nation. The manufacturers of products and equipment in other sectors adopted the principles of a new way of working: specialist machinery, new materials, power, organised and larger factories. The term ‘industry’ would come to be defined by the engineering that created new goods and equipment, and engineers who could understand and apply new science and manufacturing techniques. They added their own innovations in due course. The number of patents per decade from 1760 through to 1790 was 365, five times greater than it had been in the century of preceding decades. One notable development was the generation of components that were interchangeable, which heralded another facet of industrialisation: the development of mass production with manufacturing tolerances. Eli Whitney and Marc Brunel (father of his more famous son Isambard) pioneered these practices through gun production and naval shackles.

It wasn’t all about textiles and power though; it was about social change, too. A decline in agricultural work brought on by the newer farming methods and equipment, including threshing machines, coupled with an economic slump following the Napoleonic wars and long periods of poor weather meant that agricultural workers started to flock to the new forms of factory work and one-fifth of the country would come to work in the textile industry. This transformation of a medieval-type agrarian society into a factory-based one became known in a term affirmed by the economic historian Arnold Toynbee as the ‘Industrial Revolution’, and it really was a transformative revolution.

The resulting mixture of social change, education and ideas was commercially explosive. By 1851, Britain was mining half the world’s coal, consuming ten times more than France and six times more than the fusion of states that would become Germany. It produced half the world’s pig iron (the term for crude iron produced from furnaces), using three to four times more pig iron than anywhere else and with more train lines than Germany and France combined.4 The British Gross National Product (GNP) rose from £452 million to £523 million between 1841 and 1851, 65 per cent higher than the German states and 30 per cent higher than the US.5

Britain Expands

Britain’s industrial output was not just confined to British markets either and there was an overseas market for Britain’s increasingly unique and low-cost goods. That market was growing, too. The European population alone grew from 150 million in 1800 to 400 million by 1914. Britain’s markets were also expanding beyond just its closest European neighbours. James Wolfe had secured northern America for Britain in 1759, Captain James Cook claimed Australia for Britain in 1770 and Clive of India and the East India Company were at large in India. The total number of people who could be counted as being within the British Empire in 1900 was 436 million, a market over ten times that which the British market alone could provide.6 In India alone exports rose around 20 per cent between 1796 and 1798 and contributed 40 per cent to Britain’s Exchequer receipts during this period.7 Between 1809 and 1839 British exports generally tripled from £25 million to £76 million, and exports were often nearly double the value of imports to the country. London and Liverpool had become the busiest ports in the world as early as the 1750s, with London including docks at St Katharine’s, East and West India, Commercial, Tobacco, Shadwell, Victoria, and Wapping. The Wapping Docks built in 1799 with anchorage for 300 sailing ships and surrounded by 50 acres of warehousing, cost £5.5 million and was the world’s most expensive building project at the time.

The peak of British industrial power is considered to be sometime between the 1830s and the 1850s when the country was reaping the benefits of innovations in iron- and steel-making, textile machinery, machine tools, chemicals, canals, steam engines and steam locomotives. The world’s first Great Exhibition of 1851 in the Crystal Palace at Hyde Park further showcased Britain’s industrial prowess to a staggered world. Britain had become the workshop of the world, with British industrial power accounting for nearly 30 per cent of all global manufacturing during the 1870s and this would come to account for over 9 per cent of the world’s total Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

2

The Second and ThirdIndustrial Revolutions

Industrial Problems

If Britain’s Industrial Revolution was stunning, it would be wrong to view it as being utopian because that was far from the case. The dark, satanic, clanking, belching, roaring mills and increasing urbanisation brought disease and deprivation to the newly industrialised towns and cities. Average life expectancy during the Industrial Revolution remained the same, and even dropped for children, while average heights for the population as a whole dropped. Real wages barely rose and fell against the cost of food. Even at the height of this industrial period, the 1840s would become known as the ‘Hungry Decade’ as exports and output fell, wet and poor harvests hit food production and social unrest would arise in the face of growing slum developments. ‘Luddite’ craftsmen and workers fought against new technologies and ways of working, and farm workers rebelled through the Swing Riots.

One of the problems that Britain was facing was that although it was producing more, it was still paying for its conflicts, limiting its ability to generate sufficient profits. Its West Indian campaigns from 1793 to 1801 alone had probably cost around £30 million, while the Napoleonic wars cost the nation £831 million and the Crimean War a further £74 million.1 Under these restricted financial straits, Prime Minister Robert Peel repealed the Corn Laws in 1846, which abolished the tariffs on imported foodstuffs. These tariffs kept prices high for the vested aristocratic landowners and farmers but were indefensible given the state of the nation’s starving citizens. The repeal enabled food prices to drop and helped industry to overcome desperate wage demands. It also started Britain on its drive towards being a free-trading, tariff-free world economy, a philosophical position that had first been advocated in Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations critique in 1776.

The adoption overseas of agricultural changes and mechanisation, along with cheaper global transport, brought cheaper agricultural products and foodstuffs into Britain but also its own problems. Imports rose. Grain imports to Britain, for example, were 2 per cent in the 1830s but by the 1860s stood at 24 per cent. The Agricultural Revolution that had fired up Britain now faced a terminal decline. The value of agriculture to the British economy dropped from 17 per cent to 7 per cent between 1871 and 1911. Agricultural unemployment skyrocketed, while agricultural land use and its value dropped and the ‘Great’ or ‘Long Depression’ followed between 1873 and 1896, with its apogee in 1879.

The Second and Third Industrial Revolutions

The First Industrial Revolution, which harnessed power, iron, machinery and mass production, was followed by the Second Industrial Revolution from 1870 onwards, which saw industrialists grasp the wondrous new technology of electricity emerging at the end of the nineteenth century to, quite literally, electrify the world. New factories started to appear across Britain away from the traditional heavy industry heartlands, including, for example, in the ‘West London Industrial heartland’2 along the A4 Great West Road, where the population grew from sixty in 1901 to 250,000 by 1956.

Some of these factories were not British owned, including US companies along the A4 like Sperry, Gillette, Hoover and Firestone, because if Britain’s Industrial Revolution wasn’t utopian, it wasn’t omnipotent either. Although Britain had advocated a free global market, other countries including the US and Germany maintained high tariffs and used these to protect their markets. Hence they were able to grow their own economies and press ahead in relative terms to the British economy. These would become increasingly industrialised economies that would benefit not only from greater protection but from new technological developments, too.