Chapter II: The Organisation of the Cotton Manufacture (2)

Text size

Sometimes it is implied, particularly in popular writings, that the transition from the domestic system, as it existed in the early eighteenth century, to the factory system involved a great change in economic relationships, almost that it marked the emergence of capitalist employers. If disproof of this view were required, this account of the disputes in the smallware and the check trades in Manchester, a generation before factories definitely appeared in the district, would do something to supply it. The fact is, of course, that the domestic system was a system of capitalist employers, and the typical workpeople were in every essential respect related to these employers in the same way as after the factory made its appearance. In the domestic system the employer’s capital was mainly embodied in the materials that were given out to workpeople, and they received a wage remuneration from him for the operations they performed upon them. Between the journeymen and apprentices, and the employer, there frequently intervened persons such as the “undertakers” mentioned in connection with the smallware trade, but these men were essentially employees, even though in many cases, no doubt, they might own three or four looms. In the factory, the workpeople, who previously had been scattered over a more or less wide area, were drawn together under one roof, and their operations supervised by foremen and managers; the capital of the employers was now embodied in materials, buildings, plant and machinery; the least change was seen in the economic relationships between employers and workpeople. If it is true that labour became more dependent upon capital, it is equally true that capital became more dependent upon labour--on both sides the dependence involved was one of a greater co-operation in the processes of production.

But there was an important social change, closely connected with the decay of authoritative regulations which had been proceeding from the seventeenth century. As these regulations disappeared, the way was opened for the workpeople to begin to organise themselves as a new social class. Along with the development of the system of organisation which became dominant from the eighteenth century, the modern trade union movement was born, and through the greater part of the century it was also developing. Unfortunately, before the end of the century, under the stress of conditions consequent upon the Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars, its natural growth was checked, and it did not begin to thrive again until these conditions had passed away.

III

To complete this brief account of the organisation of the Lancashire textile industry before the coming of the factory and the rise of the new cotton manufacture, it is necessary to say something of the ways in which the manufacturers were connected with their workpeople, and also of their connections with the markets for raw materials and for finished products.

As regards the first point, it must be borne in mind that, while Manchester was the centre where the greater number of manufacturers were situated, a large number, particularly in the fustian branch, lived in the surrounding smaller towns and country districts. A glance at the following tables and the accompanying map will show that the country fustian manufacturers formed an outer semicircle of Manchester, with three outstanding points at Leigh, Bolton and Oldham. The country check-makers formed an inner circle, while the crofters (bleachers) were distributed in another circle, with a tendency to concentrate in the neighbourhood of the town.

Owing to this distribution of manufacturers, it is evident that most of the workpeople would be within easy reach of an employer, and probably the most usual thing was for them to fetch their materials from his house, or warehouse, and after working upon them, to return the product. The smaller manufacturers no doubt performed the “putting-out” function themselves, but the larger manufacturers employed men for this purpose, as the frequent advertisements for “putters-out” show. Also we can gather from the same source that in some cases “putters-out” for the town manufacturers lived in the country, and that country manufacturers sometimes worked on commission for men in the towns.[181] That some of the manufacturers were men of considerable wealth may be surmised from the frequent mention of their marriages into prominent families, and to ladies possessing “genteel fortunes.” In this way it is not unlikely that much capital found its way into the Lancashire textile industry, and proved useful in enabling the manufacturers to extend their concerns.[182]

[Footnote 181: For “putting-out” system, see Radcliffe, _Origin of Power Loom Weaving_ (1828), pp. 13, 16, 68. Gaskell, _The Manufacturing Population of England Anterior to the Application of Steam_ (1833), p. 17.]

[Footnote 182: In Mr. Percival’s _Letter to a Friend_ the following passage appears which is none the less informative because it is satirical: “Another objection against me in common with other gentlemen, is, that we envy these check-makers; really, sir, I wonder what any country gentleman can be supposed to envy them for! Is it their houses? What country gentleman has reason to envy the possessor of a house of four, five, or six rooms of a floor with warehouses under and warping rooms over?... Is it their furniture? See one room drest out like a baby house.... Is it their equipages? Surely no, when one sees their chariots or post-chaises, with a pair of callender tits, and the callender lad for coachman, it must set any spectator a-laughing at the grotesque, did not the honest horses by hanging down their heads shew that they were ashamed of their employment. Is it their cookery? Here indeed I am almost at a stand to find a reason, which a Manchester check-maker will allow for a good one, why the country gentlemen do not envy their cookery; but on recollection I have one; they must allow it as a maxim, _that the heart grieves not at what the eye sees not_; and no country gentleman that I have ever heard of, could ever yet certify what was for dinner in the house of a Manchester check-maker. The reason their good wives believe we envy them their cookery, is, that when they move into the country for some weeks in the summer, the cook is too covetous to move his shop after them, and, as they know not how to get in their own families, anything more than plain boiled or roast, they are wise enough to believe nobody knows more, and because they are half starved whilst they are out of the town of Manchester, imagine there is no good livelihood anywhere else. Is it their fine clothes? Upon my honour I know many country gentlemen better dressed. Is it their handsome perriwigs? to comfort us country folks, I know few with worse heads ...” (pp. 9-10).]

In the seventeenth and the early eighteenth centuries, as at the present day, little of the raw material used in the Lancashire textile industry was produced in the county; one way in which wool reached the worsted manufacturers is given in a quotation below.[183] But more important than wool were linen-yarn and cotton. Until the West Indian colonies and South America became important sources of the supply of cotton, it was chiefly imported through London, indeed it was not until cotton-growing had developed in the United States that London lost its position to Liverpool as the chief port of entry.[184] Early in the eighteenth century, however, much was imported by Liverpool merchants, and it was also imported through Whitehaven and Lancaster, both these ports having an important trade with the West Indies in the eighteenth century and into the nineteenth.[185]

[Footnote 183: _Infra_, p. 61.]

[Footnote 184: _Treasure of Traffike_, p. 32. Ellison, _Cotton Trade of Great Britain_, p. 170.]

[Footnote 185: _J.H.C._, xxii., pp. 566-567. Slack, _Remarks on Cotton_ (early nineteenth-century pamphlet). Aikin, _England Delineated_ (1790), pp. 39, 83. Aikin, _England Described_ (1818), pp. 26, 87.]

Of the linen-yarn used, some was spun in this country, and Scotland also contributed to the supply, and, as already noticed, in the reign of Henry VIII., merchants from Ireland carried on a trade in linen-yarn with Manchester, which they sold to the inhabitants on credit.[186] In the eighteenth century, that country with the Continental towns of Hamburg, Bremen, Dantzig, and Königsberg had become the important sources of supply, so far as the Manchester district was concerned, where English and Scotch yarn were little used.[187] The finest quality was Irish web-yarn, which was used in the Blackburn manufacture, Drogheda yarn and Sligo yarn occupying the second and third places, with Hamburg and Bremen yarn as substitutes; fine Sligo yarn was also used as weft for African goods and for handkerchiefs.[188] The yarn from Dantzig and Königsberg (known as Ermland yarn from the bishopric of Ermland) was used in the manufacture of sheeting, and this yarn and Derry tow yarn were also made into checks and other goods for exportation.[189]

[Footnote 186: _Ante_, pp. 30-31. In 1639 the Town Jury of Manchester ordered “that Anne Thorp, widow, shall have the keepinge of the scales and waights usuall for wayinge of Ireish yarne” (_Court Leet Records_, iii., p. 321). It was stated in evidence before a Committee of the House of Commons in 1736 by one witness that he bought linen-yarn, from a person in Northumberland, in one transaction, to the value of £1000 (_J.H.C._, xxii., pp. 566-567).]

[Footnote 187: _Life and Correspondence of Samuel Hibbert Ware_ (1882), pp. 96-98.]

[Footnote 188: _Ibid._, p. 98.]

[Footnote 189: _Ibid._, pp. 97-98.]

Both cotton and yarn reached the manufacturers through cotton merchants and yarn merchants, of whom there were many in Manchester.[190] Trading connections with Germany were maintained through travellers who sought orders from Manchester merchants and manufacturers, and German houses had branches in the town; also, Manchester tradesmen went to Germany themselves.[191] In addition, both cotton and yarn were sold by Manchester shopkeepers, who advertised these commodities along with such incongruous articles of merchandise as Dr. Daffey’s elixir, Anderson’s pills, tea, toys, jewellery, fiddle-strings, etc.[192]

[Footnote 190: _Infra_, p. 68.]

[Footnote 191: Ware, _ibid._, pp. 17-18. In these pages some memoranda of a commercial traveller for a Dantzig house preserved among Dr. Ware’s papers are given. _Manchester Mercury_, 3rd March 1772, contains a notice of the funeral of Daniel Kahl, eminent yarn merchant, partner of Delius & Kahl, Bremen.]

[Footnote 192: In every issue of _The Manchester Mercury_.]

As the raw materials reached the manufacturers through Manchester merchants, so did the finished products reach their markets.[193] In the case of the Chethams at the beginning of the seventeenth century, as we have seen, one part of their establishment was in Manchester and the other in London, and the same system was in vogue with firms in the eighteenth century. The Chethams appear to have confined themselves to home trade, mainly to that with the London market, although they had dealings with Irish manufacturers and sent goods to the Irish markets.[194] In the sixteenth and the seventeenth centuries, however, Manchester goods were exported to foreign countries, and during the first part of the next century considerable progress appears to have been made particularly in trade to the British Plantations.[195]

[Footnote 193: While there apparently was a distinction between merchants and manufacturers it should not be drawn too rigidly. _Cf._ Radcliffe, _ibid._, p. 131: “All those great merchants were manufacturers with scarcely an exception.”]

[Footnote 194: Raines and Sutton, _Life of Humphrey Chetham_, pp. 13, 127.]

[Footnote 195: _J.H.C._, xiv., p. 498; xvi., p. 311; xviii., p. 543; xxiii., pp. 76-78.]

The statement of Aikin that in the first decades of the eighteenth century the trade was carried on through wholesale dealers at London, Bristol, and other ports, is probably correct, and there is also evidence of the accuracy of his later statement that, during the twenty or thirty years before he wrote (1795), “the increase of foreign trade has caused many of the Manchester manufacturers to travel abroad, and agents and partners to be fixed for a considerable time on the continent, as well as foreigners to reside in Manchester.”[196] The fact that, in 1770, a group of Manchester merchants were sufficiently interested in the effects of a destructive fire at Antigua Island to open a subscription for the relief of the sufferers, suggests important trading connections with the West Indies, and in considering how these connections were maintained, an announcement in the previous year of the death of a Manchester merchant at Jamaica is significant.[197]

[Footnote 196: Aikin, _Manchester_, pp. 182-184. Radcliffe, _ibid._, p. 93.]

[Footnote 197: _Manchester Mercury_, 29th November 1769; 6th February 1770.]

As already noticed, cotton goods were manufactured for the African trade about the middle of the eighteenth century, and Guest informs us that about that time fustians began to be exported in considerable quantities to Italy, Germany and North America.[198] Writing of the time prior to the great changes in the cotton industry, Radcliffe states that the Manchester manufacturing merchants either themselves, or through merchants at London, Bristol, or Hull, carried on a large trade with the Levant, sending goods as “adventures” to the fairs of Asiatic Turkey which afterwards reached the markets in the interior of Asia. But, according to Radcliffe, the most important trade, particularly in fustians, “the old staple, by which these manufacturing merchants were raised to their princely rank,” was that with the North of China, carried on through Russia, a portion being “sent up the Black Sea, or overland from Smyrna by the Turkey Company,” and “another portion found its way, in modern times, through Leipsic to Moscow, and down the Volga to the Caspian Sea.”[199]

[Footnote 198: _Ante_, p. 29, note. Guest, _Compendious History of the Cotton Manufacture_, p. 12. About this time Manchester traders figure in the petitions against the African and the Hudson Bay Companies.]

[Footnote 199: Radcliffe, _ibid._, pp. 131-133.]

An indication of how Manchester goods were distributed about the country at the beginning of the eighteenth century is given in two petitions presented to the House of Commons from some of the inhabitants of Manchester and Stockport in 1704.[200] The petitioners protested against their being regarded as hawkers and pedlars under an Act passed a few years previously, whereas in reality they were wholesale dealers who distributed goods to many parts of the kingdom by means of horse carriage. Aikin’s account of the position at this time supplements their statement: “When the Manchester trade began to extend, the chapmen used to keep gangs of pack-horses, and accompany them to the principal towns with goods in packs, which they opened and sold to shopkeepers, lodging what was unsold in small stores at the inns. The pack-horses brought back sheep’s wool which was bought on the journey and sold to the makers of worsted yarn at Manchester, or to the clothiers at Rochdale, Saddleworth, and the West Riding of Yorkshire.”[201]

[Footnote 200: _J.H.C._, xiv., pp. 498, 504.]

[Footnote 201: Aikin, _ibid._, pp. 183-184.]

The pack-horse method of carriage was not peculiar to Manchester trade, but obtained generally. The system of travelling merchants was, however, especially characteristic of the Lancashire and Yorkshire cloth area, and these merchants were known as “Manchester men.”[202] In view of the fact that they were frequently men of considerable wealth, it is easy to understand why they disliked being regarded as hawkers and pedlars subject to duties on account of their particular kind of trade. From Leeds these “‘Manchester men’ used to go with Droves of Pack-horses loaden with ... goods to all the fairs and Market-towns almost all over the Island, not to sell by Retale, but to the shops by Wholesale, giving large credit. It was ordinary for one of these men to carry a thousand pounds worth of Cloth with him at a Time; and, having sold that, to send his Horses back for as much more; and this very often in a Summer.”[203] In all probability the description is generally true of Manchester in the early eighteenth century. But, at this time, the public carrier was beginning to displace the pack-horse,[204] and consequent upon his emergence, the particular class of merchants referred to ceased to travel with their goods, instead, they carried patterns and solicited orders, and afterwards dispatched the goods by the carriers. Thus there arose a class of men known as “riders-out,” and after the middle of the century advertisements for them become very frequent in _The Manchester Mercury_. “It was during the forty years from 1730 to 1770 that (Manchester) trade was greatly pushed by sending these riders all over the kingdom.”[205]

[Footnote 202: Smiles, _Lives of the Engineers_ (1862), i., pp. 178-181. Westerfield, _Middlemen in English Business_ (1915), pp. 313-314.]

[Footnote 203: Defoe, _A Tour through Great Britain_ (1769 edition), iii., p. 126.]

[Footnote 204: Westerfield, _ibid._, pp. 362-363.]

[Footnote 205: Aikin, _ibid._, p. 184.]

But this system could not develop fully until improvements in communications had been effected. So far as Lancashire was concerned, a start was made in 1720 with the Mersey and Irwell Navigation Act, though the contemplated scheme for a navigable waterway between Manchester and Liverpool was not completed until nearly twenty years later.[206] In the early fifties, road improvements were attracting much attention in Manchester, and the next twenty years witnessed a great advance in this direction in all parts of the country.[207] This development in road communication was accompanied by further development in water communication, the Act for the construction of the canal from Worsley to Manchester in 1759 marking a new starting-point. In 1762 the Act was passed for the canal from Manchester to Runcorn, where it joined the Mersey to Liverpool, and when it was completed the two towns were doubly linked by the old and the new navigations. The extent to which Manchester was connected with the rest of the country by road in 1772 may be seen from the number and the destination of the regular carriers in the town at that time.[208]

[Footnote 206: Baines, _Lancashire and Cheshire_, iii., pp. 84-85.]

[Footnote 207: _Manchester Mercury_, 1752 onwards. Smiles, _ibid._, p. 206. Between 1760 and 1774 452 Acts were passed for making and repairing highways.]

[Footnote 208: _Infra_, p. 71.]

With these developments the system of travelling about the country with goods, although it had changed its character somewhat, had not lost its importance, nor did it lose it for a long time. It was carried on by “petty chapmen,” and it was to such men that the terms hawkers and pedlars now applied. In the eighties of the eighteenth century a controversy arose, or rather one that had been simmering through the century reached the boiling point, which shows that men, thus designated, were still of great importance in inland trade.

As a result of the Seven Years’ War, and the American War of Independence,[209] the country was faced with a financial crisis out of which the egregious “Sinking Fund” emerged, and many new taxes were levied to raise the required revenue. None raised such opposition in Manchester as the “fustian-tax” and the successful efforts to obtain its repeal were celebrated by an annual dinner for many years afterwards.[210] But the agitation against this tax was local, compared with that which arose in 1785 in connection with a tax on shops, and a proposal to repeal the licences of hawkers and pedlars, which was intended to make the shop-tax palatable. The proposal was carried into effect to the extent that additional duties were levied on hawkers and pedlars and their trade was regulated.

[Footnote 209: National Debt, 1756, £72,000,000. End of Seven Years’ War, 1763, £136,600,000. End of American War, 1783, £238,000,000 (Bastable, _Public Finance_, pp. 632-633).]

[Footnote 210: _Life and Correspondence of Samuel Hibbert Ware_, pp. 99-101. The Bill was introduced in August, 1784, and was quickly passed. It was resolved to repeal it in June, 1785. For the agitation, see _Manchester Mercury_ and pamphlets published during these months. Details of the tax are given by Baines, _ibid._, p. 328.]

Before the proposal had taken the form of a Bill the manufacturers of Manchester entered a vigorous protest against it, as they did on other occasions after the Bill had become an Act.[211] For four years petitions and counter-petitions rained upon the House of Commons from all parts of the country, occupying a considerable portion of its _Journals_ until 1789, when the shop-tax was repealed, and the Act relating to hawkers and pedlars amended.[212] The chief arguments of the shopkeepers against the itinerant tradesmen do not require recapitulation as they are still vigorously maintained. The minor arguments, that they dealt in smuggled and stolen goods and that they corrupted the minds and morals of the younger part of the community, may be attributed to the shopkeepers’ zeal in controversy.[213] What the hawkers and pedlars--or petty chapmen--did, in fact, was to perform the useful function of linking up the country districts with the manufacturing and trading centres. In the first Manchester petition the chapmen were described as carrying goods from house to house in the country villages and districts remote from towns. It also referred to their great number in Lancashire, Staffordshire, Derbyshire, Yorkshire and Cheshire, and stated that their purchases were more considerable than had been apprehended, which no doubt was true. The manufacturers of Glasgow attributed to the chapmen no small part in the extension of manufactures in England and Scotland, through their introducing goods into places where otherwise they would not have been sent.[214] The best witness to their importance at this time is the multitude of petitions presented in their favour from the manufacturers and traders in every considerable town.

[Footnote 211: _J.H.C._, xl., p. 1001; xli., p. 283; xliv., p. 295.]

[Footnote 212: _Ibid._, xliv., pp. 276, 422.]

[Footnote 213: _Ibid._, xl., pp. 1107, 1109.]

[Footnote 214: _Ibid._, p. 1039.]

From these petitions the organisation of the trade can be clearly visualised. The custom was for the chapmen to obtain their goods from manufacturers and traders on credit, and then to sell them on credit. In this way a considerable amount of capital was used in the trade. The hawkers and pedlars of Halifax and neighbourhood asserted that they had outstanding debts to the amount of £40,000, and that they again were indebted for large sums to merchants and manufacturers in London, Glasgow, Manchester, Leicester, Nottingham, Carlisle, etc.[215] But there were also capitalist traders in some parts of the country who, apparently, were solely engaged in supplying the chapmen with goods on credit.

[Footnote 215: _J.H.C._, xl., p. 1026.]

This appears to have been the case with a member of “The Society of Travelling Scotchmen of Bridgnorth” who claimed to have £5000 employed in the trade.[216] His method was to buy goods from manufacturers in different parts of Great Britain and Ireland, and to supply them to the chapmen on credit, and, at the time, he had £3000 owing to him, while they had £1500 owing to them. Two members of a similar society at Shrewsbury, who pursued the same method, claimed to have £20,000 in the trade, with outstanding debts to the amount of £16,000, while the chapmen whom they supplied were in a similar position to the amount of £10,000.[217] Even allowing for some exaggeration in the petitions, there can be little doubt of the importance of the trade thus carried on at this time.[218] Possibly it was of more importance than some branches of trade of a more spectacular character, which, for that reason, often attract more attention.

[Footnote 216: _Ibid._, pp. 1017-1018.]

[Footnote 217: _Ibid._, p. 1020.]

[Footnote 218: The hawkers and pedlars of London and Westminster stated that they composed part of a body which numbered 1400 in England alone (_ibid._, p. 1007).]

In the preceding chapter it has been shown that a textile manufacture, which could be called a cotton manufacture, had become established in Lancashire certainly by the beginning of the seventeenth century. From what has been said so far, it will be apparent that the manufacture was by no means in a state of stagnation during the century and a half before 1770. Economically and politically, the period was a favourable one for development. The turmoil of the seventeenth century had an economic as well as a political significance. It marks the time when the opportunist regulations of industry and commerce, which are sometimes regarded as constituting part of a positive policy to further the welfare of the national community, definitely failed, notwithstanding much futile effort which continued into the next century.[219]

[Footnote 219: The year 1623 marks an important date in this connection. Unwin, _ibid._, p. 190, also _The Gilds and Companies of London_, ch. xvii. Professor W. R. Scott’s _Joint-Stock Companies to 1720_, is a storehouse of fundamental facts relating to the economic history of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.]

Consequently, the cotton manufacture was comparatively unhampered by such regulations, and it is not surprising that, particularly from the early years of the eighteenth century, development was taking place in all directions. Quite apart from the remarkable inventions of machinery and the discovery of a new source of power, it is more than probable that the latter years of the century would have witnessed considerable changes. Before these events, the developments in industrial and commercial organisation, and in communications, pointed to the fact that a wider economy was emerging. It was in such conditions that a new cotton manufacture made its appearance in Lancashire.

ANALYSIS OF CERTAIN TRADES IN MANCHESTER IN 1772

_All the following tables have been compiled from the first Manchester
Directory_

[Footnote 220: One described as dyer and printer.]

[Footnote 221: One described as manufacturer and printer.]

[Footnote 222: Two described as fustian silk and linen manufacturers.]

[Footnote 223: One described as silk and smallware manufacturer, two as silk throwsters, and one as throwster and dyer.]

[Footnote 224: One described as linen merchant.]

[Footnote 225: Two described as linen and fustian dyers.]

----------------------------------------+---
Merchants |No.
----------------------------------------+---
Yarn Merchants | 14
Cotton Merchants[228] | 5
Yarn and Cotton Merchants | 3
Yarn Merchants and Check Manufacturers | 3
Yarn Merchant and Thread Manufacturer | 1
----------------------------------------+---
Total | 26
----------------------------------------+---

[Footnote 226: One described as frieze-maker, one as woollen manufacturer and paper-maker, and one as worsted weaver.]

[Footnote 227: One described as woollen draper and cloth-worker, and one as woollen draper and check manufacturer.]

[Footnote 228: One described as dealer in cotton weft.]

[Footnote 229: One described as hatter and hosier, and one as hat-lining cutter.]

[Footnote 230: One described as dresser and cutter, and one as presser.]

[Footnote 231: One described as twister and dyer, and one as dyer printer and manufacturer.]

In the fustian list there are 22 partnerships, in the check list
20, in the smallware list 11, in the silk and linen list 9, in the
woollen list 2, and in the merchants’ list 2.

COUNTRY TRADESMEN WITH WAREHOUSES IN MANCHESTER IN 1772

CROFTERS OR WHITSTERS IN THE MANCHESTER AREA IN 1772[232]

[Footnote 232: In this list there are three partnerships.]

Fustian Manufacturers red figures
Check ” blue ”
Smallware ” yellow ”
Crofters ” green ”

The figures correspond with those in the preceding tables
e. g. Manchester, 55 Fustian Manufacturers.]

REGULAR CARRIERS FROM MANCHESTER IN 1772

------------------+---+------------------
Destination |No.| Days of Departure
------------------+---+------------------
London | 6| 5, Wed. Sat. 1, Tu.
Birmingham | 1| Fri.
Bolton | 2| Tu. Th. Sat.
Bristol | 1| Wed.
Burnley | 2| Tu. Th. Sat.
Bury | 1| Tu. Th. Sat.
Cambridge | 1| Th.
Chester | 2| 1, Tu. Th. Sat. 1, Th.
Chorley | 1| Tu. Th. Sat.
Chowbent | 1| Tu. Th. Sat.
Colne | 1| Fri.
Derby | 1| Th.
Doncaster | 1| Sat.
Halifax | 2| 1, Tu. Th. Sat. 1, Mon. Th.
Huddersfield | 1| Mon. Th. Sat.
Lancaster | 1| Mon. Fri.
Leeds | 1| Tu. Th. Sat.
Liverpool | 1| Tu. Th. Sat.
Macclesfield | 1| Tu. Th. Sat.
Newcastle-on-Tyne | 1| Th.
Northwich | 2| Tu. Th. Sat.
Nottingham | 2| 1, Th. 1, Sat.
Pontefract | 1| Sat.
Preston | 1| Mon. Fri.
Rochdale | 2| Tu. Th. Sat.
Salop | 1| Sat.
Sheffield | 2| 1, Th. 1, Fri.
Stockport | 2| Every day
Wakefield | 1| Tu. Th. Sat.
Wigan | 2| Tu. Th. Sat.
York | 1| Sat.
------------------+---+------------------

One stage-coach ran to London, and one to Liverpool, each on three
days of the week.

On the Old Navigation between Manchester and Liverpool 21 vessels
were engaged. On the New Navigation between Manchester and Warrington
9 vessels were engaged, also a number of open vessels called Tuns,
and between Warrington and Liverpool 11 vessels were engaged. A 40
Tun Boat sailed between Manchester and Altrincham three days a week,
and coal boats arrived in Manchester from Worsley every day.

Previous Next

Comments

The early English cotton industryChapter II: The Organisation of the Cotton Manufacture (2)

0%21 min left in chapter