DES KEENAN'S BOOKS ON IRISH HISTORY online version |
Pre-Famine Ireland LINKS TO INDIVIDUAL CHAPTERS CLICK PRE-FAMINE TO RETURN TO BOOK LIST; CLICK HOME PAGE TO RETURN TO HOME PAGE Pre-Famine
Secondary Sector: Factors of Production
Summary of chapter. Besides the agricultural sector the industrial sector was quite well developed in Ireland. In the towns on the East Coast it was on a par with similar towns in the north-east United States at the time. Machinery was becoming ever more important, and with it an accumulation of capital to finance development. The labour force of the period is described as well as combinations of workmen and trade unions.
(ii) The Financing of Industry
(iii) Work and the Labour Force
(v) Combinations and Trade Unions ****************************************************************************************************** The
experience in Industry
was concerned largely with the processing of food, drink, and clothing, though
there were other industries. When a region was said to be 'industrialised' it
meant that at least a 'cottage industry' was organised in it on the
'putting-out' basis, or that there were small water-powered mills or factories
in it. Even at the beginning of the century Animal
power was quite widely used to drive machinery and work pumps. Waterpower was used extensively especially
where the rivers fell off the central plateau near the coast. In Steam had come at a relatively early date to The
introduction of machinery extended far beyond the bounds of the textile
industry though we rightly associate the development of complex machinery with
that industry. A machine is defined as an apparatus for applying mechanical
power, consisting of inter-related parts, each having a definite function. It
thus differs from the simple tool or implement. But the distinction is not
always obvious in practice. For example a spinning wheel is clearly a machine,
but the much larger weaver's loom is chiefly a frame and can hardly be called a
machine until a mechanical interlinking of functions was achieved.
Implements
like ploughs, wheeled carts, carriages, barges, etc. drawn by horses (or oxen)
were not machines as defined, but were tools or implements harnessing animal
power as opposed to human power. This harnessing of animal power, in the fields
of tillage, transport, and even for driving machines, was an important part of
development and is described under the appropriate headings, but it was not a
development of machinery. The use of horses was to keep on increasing even
after the introduction of steam and only declined when the light efficient
internal combustion engine was perfected. Both
water and steam power could be used on the same site, the water providing the
cheaper power, and the steam the more reliable power. Hence, when industry
moved into the country to utilise the waterpower (and to take advantage of the
cheaper wages, the absence of guild restrictions, and the strikes by members of
combinations) it might stay on that site even after steam power was introduced. Manufactory
does not imply the use of machinery. One can have a factory filled with
bootmakers or garmentmakers using only the simplest implements. The
concentration of workers in factories was to some extent independent of the
introduction of waterpower. The earliest cotton spinning and weaving factories
antedated to use of the new machinery. The concentration of the spinners and
weavers in a single building was preferred as it lessened pilfering. (A factory
was originally the building where a factor or agent conducted the business of
trade. A manufactory was where goods were manufactured. The terms have become
confused.) An
advertisement for a woollen factory in 1783 listed a tuck mill, a gig mill, a
dye house and a dry house as its components. Spinning was done in the cottages
in the locality. Waterpower was presumably used for fulling. A cotton factory
in Balbriggan at the same time is described as being a five-storey building
with waterframes. Industries,
too, like the salting and packing of meat, brewing and distilling, or
shipbuilding, as they grew in scale tended to be concentrated in large
buildings or groups of buildings, though they were not called factories, as
this term was restricted to places where goods were manufactured.
Early
in the nineteenth century many of the manufacturing processes were seasonal.
Slaughtering and meat-packing were naturally concentrated in the autumn and
early winter. Brewing reached its peak shortly after the harvest. Spinning and
weaving were naturally concentrated at the times of year when the raw material
was ready, after the shearing of the sheep in summer,
or after the flax was retted and prepared for the spinners. Waterpowered
machines were liable to be short of water in summer. For this reason too it was
felt advisable to site factories in rural areas where alternative work might be
found.
[Top] (ii) The
Financing of Industry As
industry was being developed in the eighteenth century the usual way to raise
capital was through the sale of debenture stocks. The debenture bond was a loan at a fixed rate
of interest and was a heavy charge on the companies. Towards the end of the
eighteenth century those in charge of enterprises began to favour what are now
called ordinary shares, which conferred voting rights, and entitled the
shareholder not to a fixed income but to a share in the profits. In this way
risk was spread as well as rewards. Both
kinds of shares could be bought and sold and this was often done through
stockjobbers or stockbrokers. Sales of industrial shares were not common before
the third or fourth decade of the century. Individuals
or partnerships carried on most enterprises and these raised money not by
issuing shares but by borrowing from banks against the security of land. It was
expected of great landowners that they should use their wealth productively for
the benefit of the community by mining for minerals, reclaiming waste lands,
constructing roads, quays, etc. and many of them did so. It was felt that in In
the eighteenth century almost everyone made a routine application either to the
Irish Parliament or to the local (iii) Work and the
Labour Force Attempts to determine the amount of work done by an individual
before 1850 are virtually meaningless. A self-employed person like a
tailor, or an employed person, in industry or in domestic service might we
expected to be present at work from dawn to dusk. On the other hand, in the
eighteenth century especially absenteeism on Mondays, the 'feast of A
'swot' or 'sweat' was a piece-worker who worked hard to increase his earnings.
But it would seem likely that from 1850 onwards the output of the 'swots' or
'sweats' became the norm for all, hence the term 'sweated labour' in our sense.
How high a proportion of the workforce engaged in swotting or sweating before
that is impossible to tell. The self-employed and those on piecework work
harder for they have an immediate prospect of gain. When comparing working
conditions over the last few centuries it is essential to recall that the speed
of work was twice dramatically increased. The first was caused by the rise of
'swotting' or 'sweated labour' in the nineteenth century and the other was the
introduction of 'Taylorism' and the 'production line' in the twentieth. But the
adoption of these practices too was very uneven.
The
population of There
seems little doubt that the distribution of swotters or sweaters was similar.
About 1820 an improving landlord, Mr Parnell of Avondale, noted that people of
all walks of life in Various
people commented on the prevalence of petty dishonesty in every line of
business. Watering the milk, pilfering yarn, adulterating flour or using bleach
to whiten it, putting stones in bags of grain, keeping back some of the linen
yarn, carefully concealing faults in horses, and fluffing out loads of hay, and
even making tea from hawthorn leaves, were said to be common practices. Over
most of The
question therefore of the Protestant work-ethic arises. It is true that the
area around The
organisation of industry and commerce in towns, and the development of towns
themselves in the Middle Ages were bound up with the Guild System. Merchant
guilds date from the 11th century and craft guilds from the 12th. The leading
merchants in a town were given authority to regulate trade, and the leading
masters in a trade or craft were empowered to regulate the affairs of that
craft. Regulating a craft involved admitting new skilled tradesmen as masters,
setting wages to be paid, and limiting the numbers of apprentices. Masters were
referred to or addressed as Mister (Mr), but had not the title of esquire which
belonged to those with rank of gentleman below the rank of knight. In cities and 'corporate towns' the masters in
the guilds were empowered to elect from among themselves a body called the town
or city corporation which regulated the affairs of the town or city, and
admitted new members to the freedom of the town, in effect allowing them to
trade within the walls. Royal charter allowed them to have their own sheriff,
and a chief executive officer called a mayor. This effectively exempted them
from the jurisdiction of the local sheriff and the influence of the local
noblemen. It was felt that these latter would stifle trade by excessive
exactions, while the king wished towns, and especially seaports to develop,
providing money, ships, and seamen in time of war. The building in which they
met to decide affairs of trade or the town was called the Guild Hall. A mayor, therefore, was chiefly concerned with
the state of the markets in his town, checking weights and measures, the weight
of bread, the freshness of fish, the cleanliness of the stalls, stamping out
abuses like forestalling and regrating, licensing traders (or even strolling
players and companies of comedians) and public cabs, fixing prices, especially
that of bread, and the market tolls. In times of danger he repaired the city
walls and acted as military governor. He might oversee the building of quays,
bridges, and new streets, the deepening of the river channel or secure a supply
of fresh water.
In
the guild system in the skilled trades there were three grades of workers, the
masters, the journeymen, and the apprentices. The
masters alone belonged to the guild or corporation of their trade. Each guild
in a given city or corporate town provided itself with a building which was
called, as the case might be, the Bakers' Hall or the Tailors' Hall. The
authority of the Hall did not extend outside the limits of the city or town and
the guilds in each town were totally unconnected with each other. Collectively
the masters of each guild regulated their own branch of trade in their own city
or town. They decided who was admitted to their guild (which was not the same
as being made a freeman of the town). They set limits to the number of
apprentices taken on. They set the wages of the journeymen and could raise or
lower them to reward good workmanship or to punish idleness, but the journeymen
could appeal to the mayor. At times they acted together to market their goods
abroad, for example by chartering a ship for that purpose. Some of the master
weavers were called undertakers apparently because they undertook to supply a
specified quantity of cloth. This quantity could be obtained either from their
own journeymen or from independent weavers in the countryside. The precise
organisation of the weaving trade outside the towns is obscure. (Other aspects
of the role of the guild masters in the town are dealt with under local
government.)
Journeymen
(from jour a day) were fully trained
workmen employed by the masters. As their name implies they were free workmen,
employed for periods of one or more days by the masters, fully skilled in the
craft and so entitled to the full day's wage. They were not self-employed. They
had contracts, legally binding on either side, for periods of service. The
master could not summarily dismiss a workman, nor could he, without notice,
either leave his master, or withdraw his labour. Combinations of journeymen to
try to force up the price of their labour or to restrict the number of
apprentices were forbidden by law. Apprenticeship
was the normal way of learning a trade or profession. A boy's father paid a sum
to the master to teach the boy his trade. The master was bound to carefully
instruct the boy, and the boy was bound to work for the master. The same
principle was found in such professions as the study of law or medicine, and
even, to some extent, in the navy. The quality of the instruction doubtless
varied. When the apprentice had 'served his time' (up to seven years) he was
given his 'ticket' as a qualified journeyman, and had to leave his master to
seek work elsewhere unless his master happened to have a vacancy for him. By
the beginning of the nineteenth century the system had been weakened by many
causes. As particular fairly simple skills like spinning and weaving were to be
found more widely spread the 'putting out' system was developed. The raw
materials were taken to workers outside the towns, and so outside the
regulations of the guilds. (The country areas too were less likely to be
affected by 'strikes' by members of combinations.) As new sources of power were
developed, especially waterpower, mills and factories were built in the
countryside. Even if new towns developed they did not necessarily get an
old-style corporation. New industrial techniques might mean that complicated
manufactures needing skilled craftsmen could, by the 'division of labour', be
broken down into a series of simple actions which even children could do. (The
manufacture of the ordinary pin is usually given as the classical example.)
Masters, too, even in long established industries tended to employ unskilled
labour for the simpler tasks, for example, using unskilled sawyers to saw logs
into planks and deals, for use in the carpentry trade. As the scale of enterprises
grew the accumulation of capital became much important, so that the 'capitalist
adventurer' became more important than a master or guild of masters. Finally
the Irish Municipal Corporations Reform Act (1840) abolished all powers of
trade guilds to regulate trade in (v)
Combinations and Trade Unions It
is not easy in practice to distinguish these. Legally speaking one could say
that associations of journeymen before 1824 were illegal and therefore were
‘combinations’ and legal after that and so were 'trade unions'. If one based
the distinction on whether peaceful organisation and persuasion was used or
intimidation and violence he would find that the former was also to be found
before 1824 and the latter persisted after. As the trial of the so-called
'Tolpuddle Martyrs' in It
is not clear when 'combinations' of journeymen were first organised in Combinations
(or protection rackets) existed also outside the guild system, notably among
farm labourers, miners, and fishermen. Also there were groups who advocated the
use of violence to secure independence for Journeymen
shoemakers in However
in 1801, at a different trial intimidation was alleged, and in 1802 journeymen
tailors were convicted of assaults. The year 1822 saw widespread agrarian crime
so it is no surprise to find violence being used by members of a 'trade union'
in Despite
the law there was considerable sympathy for the view that journeymen ought to
be allowed to combine against masters if masters combined against workmen
provided no violence or intimidation was used. A Parliamentary committee
chaired by Joseph Hume in 1824 reached the same conclusion. An Act permitting
workmen to form trade unions was passed in 1824, but was followed immediately
by a wave of strikes, and so had to be emended in 1826. Strikes with peaceful
picketing were allowed so that strikers could persuade others to join them. All
violence and intimidation was made illegal. A fortnight's notice of the
intention to strike had to be given to enable the master to complete contracts
already undertaken or to find alternative workers who would complete the
contracts. After
1826 the existing Irish unions seem to have taken on a legal existence and
abolished the now illegal oaths. By 1845 most of the trades in The
trade union movement was not furthered in The
Trades Political Union revived when the law against O’Connell's associations
lapsed, but then it did its own reputation no good by its campaign to get him
elected in By 1845 the trade
unions had concluded that they had been led into a blind alley by O'Brien.
Another association called the 'Association of Regular Trades' was formed, and
it confined itself to the immediate concerns of its members. A newspaper for
trade unionists called The Dublin Argus
was started in 1845. In
1863 another attempt was made to unite the unions in |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Copyright Desmond J. Keenan, B.S.Sc.; Ph.D. ;.London, U.K.
|