2

introduced in the time of Elizabeth, although the novelty in this case consisted chiefly in the adoption of an improved process of manufacture, which, it was hoped, would make England largely independent of imports.1 As early as the first half of the seventeenth century soap boiling was no longer reckoned as one of the crafts which came under Elizabeth's Statute of Apprentices, but was "an art of mystery," which any free burgess, knowing the process and possessed of the necessary resources, might practise. In the middle of the eighteenth century a considerable sum, relatively speaking, was considered necessary, according to trustworthy evidence, for the initial capital of each concern, the work being done by "Labourers" and "Foremen," no longer by Journeymen.3 There is no doubt that as early as the seventeenth century the manufacture of soap, where not carried out in private houses, was organised in a capitalist fashion. The Company of Soapmakers of Westminster incorporated in 1631 was prepared to deliver wholesale, and promised the Crown to supply 5000 tons of soap yearly. When the business was transferred in 1639 to another company the latter paid for plant and material a purchase price of £20,050.*

As a last example of the new capitalist organisation we may take the wire industry. While in Germany wiredrawing mills driven mechanically were introduced as early as the first half of the fourteenth century, the use of water power for drawing wire was first brought into England by a German in the second half of the sixteenth century. Till then, though the wire industry was practised as a craft in various parts of England, and especially in

1Cunningham, pp. 78 and 306.

2' A Looking Glass for Sope Patenters,' London 1646, p. 5.

The general Shop Book,' London 1750, under soap.

A short and true Relation concerning the Soap Business,' London 1641,

p. 3 and ff.; also G. Unwin, 'Gilds of London,' London 1908, p. 323.

MINING-TIN IN CORNWALL

7

the Forest of Dean, the main supply, both of wire and carding wire, had to be imported. On the introduction of the new process a large capitalist factory arose at Tintern, of which we are told that it often produced more in the year than it could dispose of in England. When leased in 1592 the factory commanded a rental of £1000 a year, and employed workmen who received as much as £80 a year in wages, and were attracted from a distance, besides many thousand poor" who found employment in the works of the company incorporated in 1568. On the other hand the finishing processes remained in the hands of craftsmen, who drew their raw material from the capitalist factories.1

Contemporary mining shows another group of capitalist undertakings. At the end of the sixteenth century Cornish tin mining was in an unfavourable position; many works had come to a standstill owing to the increasing cost of working in deeper levels; 2 and the introduction of pumping machinery had become an essential preliminary to any increase of production. Presumably to bring the capital necessary for this purpose into the mining industry, Queen Elizabeth conceded her royal mining rights to a number of capitalists, a policy continued by the English kings until 1643.3 As a consequence the producers, hitherto independent miners and smelters, became economically dependent on capitalists. In 1630 Judge Doderidge complains that "the mine workers in respect of their poor Estate are eaten out by the hard and usurious contracts for tin" (a state of affairs exactly parallel to the conditions ruling as early as the sixteenth century in German tin mining)," "as those poor labourers being not able to maintain themselves and their families... are by necessity compelled for a small sum of money to enter bonds with

4

1 Price, pp. 55-58.

2.The Tinners' Grievances,' London 1697, p. 2.

3G. R. Lewis, 'The Stannaries,' London 1908, p. 217.

4'Tinners' Grievances,' London 1697, p. 217.

5 Sombart, Der moderne Capitalismus,' Leipzig 1902, i. p. 401.

8

TIN IN CORNWALL

the said regraters of tin, in value much more than the money they had received from them."

The persons here called "mine-workers" must, it is true, be still regarded as formally independent, in spite of their name, as they produced their tin at their own cost and risk. But in reality they were nothing but the instruments of their capitalist purveyors, who sold to the "labouring tinners" at extortionate prices the necessary mining materials, receiving payment in tin at far beneath its market value.1 Further, the smelters were compelled to have recourse to advances from capitalists 2 by the provisions of the law as to sales, which only allowed tin to be delivered twice a year, at Midsummer and Michaelmas. On the other hand the producers, thus dependent on capitalist assistance, were in their turn employers, for the great mass of those employed in tin mining were ordinary labourers. As early as 1601 Sir Walter Raleigh, who knew tin mining well, spoke of the 'poor workmen" who formerly received 2 shillings a week, but now 4 shillings. A document of about the same time states that "the most part of the workers of the black tin are very poor men, and, no doubt, that occupation can never make them rich... for they have no profit of their tin if they be hired men, for their masters have the tin.”

5

The need of capital, therefore, brought with it a triple classification of the persons concerned in the industryfirst, the capitalist trader; secondly, the producer or working master without resources of his own and drawing all his supplies from the capitalist; and lastly, the labourer he employed. During the seventeenth century the state

1'Aggravii Venetiani,' London 1697, p. 3 (Proposal to raise the prices, etc.). 2 Unwin, p. 154. Lewis, pp. 149-150.

'Parliamentary History,' vol. i. Debate of 20th November 1601.

"'Journal Royal Statistical Society,' 1838, p. 71.

Lewis, p. 216. He distinguishes (1) 'merchant buyers'; (2) 'non-labouring shareholders,' 'small independent miners,' 'in some cases ore dealers'; (3) 'wage workers.'

NORTH OF ENGLAND COAL

9

of affairs so far changed that the capitalists became themselves "adventuring tinners" working their own mines, and further, had an interest "in most of the smelting-houses, which they either managed themselves or leased to poor smelters." 1 In this way there arose in tin mining after 1600 a class of capitalists who appeared on the one hand as traders under the name of "merchants," supplying independent working masters, and on the other hand gradually became themselves "masters," and laid aside the disguise of mere traders. The final stage of this development was reached when the London merchants' agents, who had formerly disposed of the tin to the finishers, were gradually extinguished, and the capitalist smelters took over the tin trade and sent their orders direct from London.2 According to the statements of Mr. Lewis this system is still in vogue.

The most important factor in the early English industrial capitalism was, however, the development of North of England coal. The first authentic records go back to 1213.3 About 1246 coal from the Newcastle district received the name 'sea coal,' which proves that already in those days it was carried by sea. From the end of the sixteenth century its hold on the more distant markets, more especially on London and the neighbourhood, continually increased. While, according to Harrison, export coals "had first taken up their innes in the greatest merchants' parlours" in 1577, about 1640-50 an increase in the price of coal was already considered a great injury to the poor. Originally only irregular shipments, the export of coal to France had so developed by 1552 that "France can lyve no more withoute"

5

1'Tinners' Grievances,' p. 4 and ff.; Lewis, p. 223.

"Unwin, p. 153; 'Grievances,' p. 4, and Lewis, p. 223.

3 Th. Wood Bunning, 'The Duties on Coal,' Newcastle 1883, p. I.

'M. Dunn, 'View of the Coal Trade,' Newcastle 1843, pp. 12-13.

*R. Gardiner, 'England's Grievance Discovered,' 2nd ed., Newcastle 1796 (an exact copy of the original edition of 1655), p. 193.

English coal "than the fische withoute water";1 and in the days of Elizabeth the trade thus rapidly rising to importance was used for revenue purposes by the introduction of an export duty on coal.2 But the chief increase in shipments took place in the seventeenth century. The numerous statistics and figures of production given in various documents of the time appear on inspection so contradictory that they are not worth much, especially in view of the often uncertain details of weight. But it is a certain fact that the annual coasting trade was estimated in 1663 for revenue purposes at 160,000 chaldrons, or about 450,000 tons; and according to an official return in 1871 the entire coal production of England in 1660 was about 2 million tons." The statistics concerning the means of sea transport for coal are also striking. A single ship had a carrying capacity in 1421 of about 20 chaldrons (I chaldron about 26 tons), in 1653 six or seven times that amount was given as the average cargo. In 1676 Sir William Petty put the tonnage of the vessels employed in the Newcastle coal carrying trade at 80,000 tons, and stated that it had increased fourfold in the last forty years.7

6

=

As the outlet for North England coal in more distant markets increased, coal mining acquired the impress of a large capitalist undertaking. The Elswick mine, one of the most important, originally let by the Abbey of Tynemouth in 1330 for a rent of £5 a year, brought in 200 years later only £20, but in 1538 £50. In 1582 Queen Elizabeth leased the manors of Gateshead and Wickham, which were rich in coal deposits, for £90 a year, and shortly afterwards transferred her lease to the town of Newcastle for a payment of £12,000.9 The

1Galloway, 'History of Coal Mining,' p. 20.

3 Brand, History of Newcastle.'

"Cunningham, i. p. 530.

2 Bunning, p. 4.

4

* Dunn, p. 18.

"Dunn, p. 12, and Gardiner, p. 105.

"A. Anderson, ‘Geschichte des Handel,' Riga 1778, part vi. pp. 17 and 18.

8 Dunn, pp. 14 and 19.

9 Gardiner, pp. 13 and 14.