The cotton manufacturing industry of the United States

Preface

Cotton manufacturing constitutes at the present time one of the most important industries in the United States, and in volume of output this country ranks second among the nations of the world, The task here undertaken is to set forth the relative position of the American cotton manufacturing industry by means of an international comparison of geographical factors, technical methods, labor conditions, and industrial and commercial organization. To provide a basis for comparisons and conclusions, the history of the industry in America is traced and its present organization analyzed. In the historical section attention is directed particularly to the period since i860, but in the first chapter the history of the industry prior to the outbreak of the American Civil War is sketched.

The work has necessarily been restricted at several points. The early history is not given more space because, for the purposes of this study, it has seemed advisable to concentrate upon the later period. A history of wages in American cotton mills has not been undertaken because of the vast amount of time that would be required to secure the data on which to base any reliable conclusions. In the second part very little is said concerning the European lace industry, because of its complicated character and the small size of our own lace manufacture. Finally, but slight reference has been made to the social conditions under which the operatives live, and no attempt has been made to compare cost of living in the different countries. The object has been to secure unity, and by no means to imply that the question of laborers' welfare or standard of living is less worthy of investigation.

The data for the analysis of the present situation in America and for the comparison of European and American conditions have been obtained largely by personal investigation and inquiry.

Vlll

PREFACE

Manufacturers, merchants, and other persons connected with the industry have been consulted, in New England, New York, Philadelphia, and the southern mill towns; in various towns in Lancashire; in Bremen, Berlin, Saxony, The Rhine Province, Bavaria, Wiirttemberg, and Alsace; in Switzerland; and in Paris, the " Nord," the Vosges, and Normandy. Mills have been visited in all these districts. More than two hundred persons have been interviewed personally and information has been obtained from others by correspondence. Statements of fact in the text not otherwise vouched for are usually based on such information. In inquiries of this sort the personal equation must be allowed for, but by checking up the statements of one man with those of others, I feel confident that, although a few errors and misstatements have doubtless crept into the book, they have been reduced to the minimum.

Inasmuch as this monograph was submitted for the Wells Prize competition in November, 191 1, and delivered to the publishers in March, 191 2, the Tariff Board's Report on Cotton Manufactures appeared too late to permit me to utilize its data in this work. My own conclusions concerning comparative costs, however, are substantially the same as those of the Tariff Board.

I began the study of the cotton manufacturing industry while holding the Charles Carroll Everett Fellowship of Bowdoin College, and continued my researches while an Austin Teaching Fellow at Harvard University. Later, to enable me to conduct the investigation of the industry in the European countries, I was granted a Frederick Sheldon Fellowship from the latter institution. Without this aid the task would not have been completed.

To the numerous business and professional men who have assisted in the carrying on of the study grateful acknowledgment is due, particularly to Major H. L. Higginson, Mr. E. A. Whitman, Mr. Sidney Coolidge, Mr. S. S. Dale, and General S. M. Weld of Boston, Mr. H. L. Knoop and Mr. J. R. Barlow of Manchester, England, Mr. C. A. Albrecht of Bremen, and

PREFACE IX

Dr. Eduard Simon and Professor Schmoller of Berlin. I am deeply indebted to Professor F. W. Taussig for friendly advice and helpful criticism and to Professor Edwin F. Gay for constant encouragement, valuable suggestions, and a kindly oversight over the preparation of the manuscript.

M. T. Copeland.

Part I History And Present Organization Page

I. Growth Before i860 3

II. Growth Since i860 17

Spinning and Weaving 17

Lace and Small-Wares 22 y ' III. Geographical Distribution 27

New England 27

Middle Atlantic States 30

Southern States 32

IV. Technical Development 54

Yarn and Cloth Manufacturing 54

V. Technical Development (continued) 101

Knitting 101

VI. Labor 112

Employees 112

Labor Unions 123

Wages 128

VII. Textile Schools 134

VIII. Scale of Production and Specialization 140

Large Scale Production 140

Specialization 145

' IX. Associations and Combinations 154

Associations ' 155

Amalgamations 161

Integration 171

X. The Raw Cotton Market 176

XL The Cloth Market 193

History 193

Present Organization 207

XII. Export Trade 220

XIII. Import Trade 232

Cloth and Fancy Goods 232

XIV. Import Trade (continued) 253

XV. Dividends and Prices 262

Xll

CONTENTS

Part II The Relative Position Of The United States Page

XVI. Geographical Factors 275

XVII. Relative Labor Conditions 287

Wages 294

Wage Agreements 305

Textile Education 309

XVIII. Plant; Scale of Production; Specialization ..... 312

Management 318

Scale of Production 320

Specialization 326

XIX. Combinations 333

Associations 333

Amalgamations 339

XX. Knit Goods 346

General Comparison 346

Scale of Production 348

XXI. Raw Cotton Markets 354

XXII. English Markets 361

Manchester 361

Nottingham 372

XXIII. Continental Markets 374

France and Switzerland 382

XXIV. Conclusions 386

Appendix 391

INDEX 407

PART I HISTORY AND PRESENT ORGANIZATION

THE COTTON MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY OF THE UNITED STATES

HISTORY AND PRESENT ORGANIZATION

Chapter I

Raw cotton was imported into New England from the West Indies before the middle of the seventeenth century, 1 and small importations continued during the following hundred and fifty years. 2 This material was spun into yarn and also used for other purposes. 3 But it was not till the last decade of the eighteenth century that the manufacture of cotton was begun on a considerable scale in the United States.

The progress of the industry prior to 1790 had been handicapped by the dearth of labor and capital. It may have been checked somewhat by the colonial policy of the British government. The jealousy with which England guarded the new inventions of cotton manufacturing machinery retarded their introduction into America. Finally the Revolutionary War and the subsequent period of industrial instability also hindered the expansion of the industry. But these last three factors were obstacles of a secondary order in comparison with the fundamental economic conditions in regard to labor and capital.

After several ventures at different places in New England, the first successful cotton mill was started in Rhode Island in 1790. The owners of the mill secured the services of Samuel Slater, a young Englishman who had worked in a cotton mill

1 W. B. Weeden, Economic and Social History of New England, vol. i, pp. 163, 170.

3 A. M. Earle, Home Life in Colonial Days, p. 206.

in his native land. Seeking a broader opportunity, he came to this country in response to an advertisement of a society for the promotion of industrial growth. He was not able to bring with him any models or plans, owing to the severe restrictions imposed by the British government. Yet he constructed from memory the water-frame and other machines in use in Great Britain. Thus the elementary technical knowledge was supplied and one of the obstacles to the growth of the industry removed.

During the next fifteen years the progress was slow. Several mills were established, but the conditions were not favorable to rapid development. In the first place the competition of the experienced British manufacturer was encountered. Furthermore the inhabitants of the sparsely populated country were engaged in other occupations, chiefly agriculture and foreign trade. Consequently the supply of labor was inadequate. Moreover the capital was invested in shipping and foreign commerce. Another handicap was the difficulty of obtaining the raw material, since it was not till 1793 that the invention of the cotton gin made possible the utilization of the upland cotton of the South.

The period of the second contest with England, however, witnessed a rapid expansion of the cotton manufacturing industry in America. With the Embargo of 1807, the Non- Intercourse Act, and the War of 181 2, the supply of cotton goods from Great Britain was almost entirely cut off and the Americans were thrown upon their own resources. The high prices of cotton cloth attracted investors to this form of industrial enterprise, and at the same time the restrictions on foreign trade encouraged the withdrawal of capital from the sea.

Several New England men who had accumulated wealth in foreign commerce now became interested in cotton mills in their own country. Mr. Nathan Appleton, for example, who played a prominent part in the financing of a number of the new mills, had until 1807 been engaged in the import trade. 1 Mr. P. T. Jackson, associated with Mr. Appleton and others in the pro-

1 Professional and Industrial History of Suffolk County, vol. iii, p. 504.

motion of cotton mills, had previously been interested in the India trade. 1 Mr. Francis C. Lowell was an importing merchant till 1 8 10, when the international dispute so cut into his business that he determined to become a cotton manufacturer, crowning his career in that field by the invention of a power loom.

The statistics for this early period are not very reliable, and the estimates of various persons differ. Yet they all agree in showing that the number of spindles increased rapidly after 1807. The period following that year was the time when cotton spinning was firmly established as a factory industry in the United States, although it had been founded seventeen years earlier. The following figures were given by Mr. Woodbury in a report to Congress. 2

Number of Spindles in the United States

1810 87,000

Although the number of spindles continued to increase after the close of the war in 18 14, the young industry was beset with difficulties. The American manufacturers were no longer protected from their foreign competitors by the prohibitions of war, and the British merchants began to ship large quantities of cotton goods to America. The influx of this pent-up stream threatened destruction by pushing the exorbitant prices down to a low level.

From this ruinous competition the American manufacturers sought relief in two ways. For a time the tariff of 181 6 aided them. Of more importance, however, in warding off the imminent calamity, was their ingenuity in improving their machinery. All the early mills had been equipped according to the English plans introduced by Slater, but during the war the manufacturers began to experiment for themselves. The most important invention of that period was the power loom in 18 14 by Lowell,

1 Professional and Industrial History of Suffolk County, vol. Hi, p. 506. 8 24th Congress, 1st session, Executive Document, No. 146, p. 51.

who constructed the machine independently of any English plans or models. A year later looms of the English type were introduced, 1 and within a few years practically all of the cotton cloth manufactured in the country was woven on power looms, although in Pennsylvania yarn was sold for household use till 1840. 2

Another factor in the development of the industry was the increasing production of raw cotton in the southern states and the consequent decline in the price of the raw material. While this benefited the foreign manufacturers as well as those in America, it nevertheless stimulated a greater demand for cotton cloth and thus gave all a better chance. This cheaper material partially supplanted wool. Finally, the population of the country was becoming larger and wealthier; hence a larger market was afforded.

The industry progressed steadily from 1830 to i860, as is indicated by the following table. The statistics for 1831 were collected by a committee appointed at the convention of " The Friends of Domestic Industry " 3 held in that year, and included only the mills in New England and the Middle States. The other figures are mainly from the census reports, and are admittedly inaccurate, though not without significance.

Cotton Manufactures, 1831-1860

Establishments Cotton Used Spindles Value of Product

(pounds)

The greater efficiency of the machinery at the later dates is indicated by the increase in the consumption of raw cotton at a rate more rapid than that of the number of spindles. The

1 J. L. Bishop, History of American Manufactures, vol. ii, p. 207.

2 Eighty Years' Progress, vol. ii, p. 284.

3 A convention of American manufacturers was held in New York, October 26, 1 83 1, with a view to promoting their interests by tariff legislation. The sentiment was strongly protectionist, and its Report, from which these facts were ascertained, was issued in the name of " The Friends of Domestic Industry."

quantity of raw cotton also increased relatively faster than the value of the product, thus reflecting the fall in the price of cloth as a result of cheaper cotton and more economical methods of manufacture. The number of establishments, on the other hand, did not increase after 1840; the mills were becoming larger, and the little ones passing out of existence.

While the industry was progressing in the United States, it did not reach the proportions of the British cotton manufacturing industry. The total number of spindles in Great Britain was estimated at about 21 millions in 1850, 1 and at 30 millions in 1 86 1. 2 The quantity of raw cotton used in England was correspondingly greater than in America. The same factors which had stimulated the introduction of cotton manufacturing in Great Britain in the last half of the eighteenth century, — climate, water-power, coal, inventive genius, and business ability, as well as freedom from social and political restraints, — these forces continued to promote the growth of the industry in later years.

On the continent the development of the industry was retarded by unsettled political conditions and frequent wars, by numerous local customs barriers, and by contentment on the part of entrepreneurs and workmen with antiquated methods. In France there were in 1867 about 6 million spindles, 3 not including doubling spindles; in Germany the number of spindles in 1840 was 658,358,* and in i860 about 2 millions. 5 In both of these countries the industry was still carried on in small plants, and even in the homes.

The first cotton mills in America were in New England and there they increased most rapidly during this period. Some were built in the Middle States, and a few elsewhere, but the conditions were not as favorable in other parts of the country as in New England, where there was abundant water-power and more available capital. The supply of labor to be had was also

1 L. Levi, History of British Commerce, p. 410.

4 W. Lochmuller, Die Baumwollindustrie in Deutschland, p. 21. 6 A. Oppel, Die Baumwolle, p. 656.

relatively greater in that region of rock-ribbed hills and unfertile soil, where the " Yankee " sentiment encouraged thrift and industry on the part of all, including women and children.

The geographical distribution of the industry in i860 is shown by the Census statistics of that year.

Cotton Manufactures, i860

Establishments

New England . 570 Middle States 340

Cotton Used (pounds)

283,700,000

87,100,000

Spindles

3,800,000 1,000,000

Value of Product

South 159

West 22

43,900,000 7,900,000

300,000 40,000

8,100,000 1,600,000

New England with fifty-two per cent of the establishments in i860 had seventy-five per cent of the spindles, whereas the Middle States with thirty-one per cent of the establishments had only twenty per cent of the spindles. The same ratios held for the number of looms. New England not only had more mills than all the other states combined, but the mills in this section were larger than those elsewhere. The average number of spindles per establishment was 6,700 in New England as compared with 2,900 in the Middle States, and a still smaller number in the other parts of the country. The average New England mill, therefore, was at least twice as large as the average sized mill in the other states.

Within the New England states the industry was centralized in Massachusetts and Rhode Island. These two states had forty-eight per cent of all the spindles in the country in i860, and Massachusetts alone had thirty per cent. In these states several large centres had grown up, — Providence, Fall River, and Lowell. Manchester in New Hampshire was another. In the Middle States, Philadelphia was the largest cotton manufacturing city.

Thus, prior to the Civil War the cotton manufacturing industry not only expanded, but showed well-defined tendencies toward concentration and localization. Its internal structure, moreover, was also undergoing change.

The American cotton manufacturers early began to develop machines especially suited to the prevailing industrial conditions. They were urged on by the dearth of labor to supplant human muscle and eyesight as far as possible with mechanical power and automatic appliances. They found it economical to seek the greatest possible output per operative. On this depended the prosperity of the growing industry. The machinery in all departments was steadily improved so as to accomplish more and better work. Mention has already been made of the invention and adoption of the power loom, one of the first accomplishments. Another invention, of especial significance to the student of the later history of the industry, was that of the ring spindle, about 1830, by Mr. Jenks, a pupil of Slater. 1 It was a modification of the throstle, which had been developed from the water-frame of Arkwright. The modification consisted in the replacing of the double armed flyer of the throstle by a wire, or " traveller," running on a fixed steel ring. At first it was applied only to twisting, but soon came to be used for spinning and even before the Civil War competed on about equal terms with the mule which had been introduced from England. •

The use of improved machinery run at high speed and equipped with various automatic stop motions gave a comparatively large output per machine and per unit of labor. One of the most trustworthy accounts of the state of the industry prior to i860 is that written in 1840 by James Montgomery, who had been engaged in cotton manufacturing in Great Britain before coming to America. He commented on the greater use of stop-motion devices in the American mills, 2 and remarked that " the factories at Lowell produced a greater quantity of yarn and cloth from each spindle and loom (in a given time) than was produced in any other factories, without exception, in the world." 3

England, in the meantime, was advancing in technical development. The mule, for example, was being increased in length and improved in the working parts. At first the mule contained about 144 spindles, but by 1835 the average length was over 300

1 Eighty Years' Progress, vol. ii, p. 286.

2 J. Montgomery, Cotton Manufacture, p. 56. a Ibid., p. 162.

IO THE COTTON MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY

spindles, and by i860 the latter number had been doubled. 1 The self-acting mule was invented about 1825 and resulted in a reduction of the amount of labor necessary for spinning cotton yarn. The self-actor, however, although improved from time to time, was used only for spinning coarse counts till after i860.

In weaving, to take another department, the use of the power loom by English manufacturers began before it did in the United States. But the hand loom continued to be employed in Great Britain for weaving cotton cloth after it had been entirely dispensed with in this country. The difficulties with which the transition was made in England are recorded in the Parliamentary reports on the hand-loom weavers and their sufferings. The invention of the Blackburn loom in 1828 sounded the knell of the hand loom, but it was not entirely eliminated till after 1850.

The American manufacturers not only were the first to adopt the power loom exclusively but they secured a relatively greater output per laborer by inducing the weavers to tend more looms. In i860 the average number of looms per weaver was four in the United States, and two in Great Britain; 2 the higher earnings in the former country being accompanied by greater productivity.

On the Continent new machines and new methods did not find a ready acceptance. Only a fourth of the spindles in operation in France in i860 were self-acting mules. 3 In the same country the power loom had hardly come into use at that date 4 and did not oust the hand loom till some years later. 5 Likewise in Germany hand mules and hand looms were in general use in i860. 6 Under such circumstances the French and Germans were not very dangerous competitors, at least on coarse plain goods which could be produced in large quantities.

Cotton manufacturing developed earlier in Great Britain than in the United States and in i860 there were nearly six times

1 T. Ellison, Cotton Trade of Great Britain, pp. 65-66.

2 S. Batchelder, Early Progress of the Cotton Manufacture, p. 90.

3 L. Ame, Les Tarifs de Douanes, vol. i, p. 312.

6 Enquete sur I'Etat de V Industrie Textile, vol. ii, p. 12; vol. iv, p. 100. 6 A. Oppel, Die Baumwolle, p. 656.

GROWTH BEFORE i860 II

as many spindles and slightly over three times as many power looms in operation in the former country. Nevertheless the American industry was in a healthy condition and was ahead of the Continental European. The American manufacturers had met the requirements of the conditions incident to a young country with a large area of fertile agricultural land and a consequently high scale of wages. By skillful adjustment of labor and machinery they had established themselves, in the manufacture of the coarser fabrics, on a firm competitive basis. The situation in i860 was summed up by Mr. Samuel Batchelder, a competent critic, who said: " The advantage of manufacturing in England on account of wages is much less than we have generally supposed. . . . Fine articles, or such as require experience and skill, can undoubtedly be produced cheaper there than here; but it is questionable whether heavy goods such as drilling and sheeting, which make up a very large proportion of the consumption of this country, can be produced cheaper than in the United States." 1

The substitution of machinery for labor in American cotton mills is roughly indicated by the smaller relative increase in the number of persons employed as compared with the increase in the number of spindles. The latter was over four times as great in i860 as in 1831, while the former was only twice as large. The following table gives the details of the changes in number of employees. The statistics for 183 1 are those collected by " The Friends of Domestic Industry," the others are Census figures.

Employees in Cotton Mills

Total Male Female Children

The children were classed in the Census returns only according to sex. Hence it is not possible to ascertain the exact composition of the labor force. As to the prevalence of child labor,

1 S. Batchelder, Early Progress of the Cotton Manufacture, p. 91.

Miss Abbott has concluded that " children formed a very large proportion of the total number of employees." l Since there is no reason to suppose that the girls greatly outnumbered the boys, we may conclude that the number of women employed in cotton mills was considerably in excess of the number of men.

The labor during the first five decades of the nineteenth century was supplied mainly by the native population, that is by descendants of the English settlers. The sons and daughters of the farmers entered the mills to get a start in life. But they looked upon it merely as a temporary employment, frugally saving their earnings to help pay for a farm, to enter business, or, in the case of the young women, to assist in furnishing a home. No stigma was attached to work of this sort; on the contrary it was looked upon with favor by a majority of the people.

Inasmuch as the operatives were an independent class, and since they were frequently changing, the managers felt compelled to make the environment as attractive as possible. 2 It is true that the hours were long, from sunrise to sunset, but there was an absence of abusive treatment and unhealthy conditions. This served especially to protect the children. Although child labor was practically unregulated before i860, there seems to have been no brutality, 3 and the children in the American mills were not subjected to those abuses which make the early history of the English cotton factory so dark. 4 The superior conditions in the American mills were due in part to the fact that there were no pauper apprentices and that the children were usually under the oversight of parents or relatives. Then, too, perhaps a warning had been taken from the reports of conditions in England. But the absence of a permanent operative class and the high moral standards of the factory employees had most to do with eliminating abuse.

1 Edith Abbott, " Study of the Early History of Child Labor in America," American Journal of Sociology, vol. xiv, p. 25.

3 Edith Abbott, op. cit., p. 34.

4 Mr. Persons has concluded that the conditions of child labor in New England mills early in the nineteenth century were " immeasurably above the English level." C. E. Persons, M. Parton, and M. Moses, Labor Laws and their Enforcement, p. 5.

The frequently changing supply of labor exerted an influence in other directions. One of these was technique. It was necessary to adopt machinery which did not require a great amount of skill, since, as Mr. Batchelder phrased it " the greater part of those at work in the mills were only a succession of learners, who left the business as soon as they began to acquire some skill and experience." * The automatic devices, the ring spindle, and other inventions not only diminished the quantity of labor required, but made its quality less important. The introduction of immigrant labor took place with less friction than would have been possible had there been a fixed operative class, and the technical improvements were likewise favorable to the utilization of the unskilled foreigner, since it made little difference to the manager whether he employed unskilled Americans or unskilled Irishmen. The exact date when the employment of immigrants in our cotton mills began is uncertain, but it was before 1836, since in that year Miss Martineau wrote: " A large proportion of the labor in the Lowell factories is supplied by women. Much of the rest is furnished by immigrants. I saw English, Irish, and Scotch operatives." 2 The male immigrants were at first employed only for the rough work around the mill, but they gradually assumed positions as machine tenders. Foreign women appeared in the mills somewhat later. Mr. Miles collected statistics for the nationality of the females employed in the Lowell mills in 1847, 3 which show that at that date the greater part of the women were of New England parentage, although a few were from Ireland.

The stream of immigrants, however, which became large in volume after 1845, turned at once toward the cotton mills as the most available point whence to begin the industrial ascent in the new country. The Irish were the first to come in large numbers and they began to take the places of the native employees as the latter dropped out. The transition was made quietly, for the most part, and attracted little comment from contemporary writers.

1 S. Batchelder, Early Progress of the Cotton Manufacture, p. 89.

2 H. Martineau, Society in America, vol. ii, p. 55.

3 H. A. Miles, Lowell as it was and as it is, p. 185.

Neither the machinery nor the labor employed in the United States at this period were favorable to the manufacture of fine or fancy cloths. The greatest demand, moreover, was for plain coarse and medium fabrics, such as could be most economically manufactured in the country. Expensive goods, in the production of which more labor and more skill were required, were obtained from Europe.

The import trade in cotton goods, therefore, was made up largely of the more expensive fabrics and fancy articles. The average annual value of the imports increased from about nine million dollars in the decade 1821-1830 to twenty-six and a half million dollars in the decade 1851-1860, or nearly threefold. The increase in volume of imports was especially great during the last decade of this period, when the average annual value nearly doubled. 1

Imports of Cotton Manufactures, 1821-1860 2 {Average annual value)

Total Plain Cloth Colored Cloth Knit Goods All Other

Owing to an incomplete classification during three years of the last decade, it is not possible to separate the average value of plain cloth from the average value of colored cloth. But the figures for i860, the year of the largest importation up to that time, reflect what had been taking place during the decade. In i860 the total value of the cotton manufactures imported was $38,200,000. The value of the plain cloth imported was $1,200,000; of colored cloth, $25,900,000; and of all other cotton goods, $11,100,000; thus those goods classed as "printed, painted, or colored " heavily predominated.

From 1850 to i860 was the period of greatest prosperity for the cotton industry in this country up to that time, although the duties were low and the importation of cotton goods nearly

1 All imports increased rapidly during these years.

2 U. S. Commerce and Navigation Reports.

doubled. This points to the conclusion that the general industrial conditions and the prosperity of the country had more to do with the progress of the industry than any stimulating tariff. After the industry was well established it mattered little to the cotton manufacturers whether the tariff was high or low. The act of 18 1 6 probably did serve to assist the infant industry, and later acts may have somewhat encouraged the production of goods of a higher grade. 1 But the latter was also fostered by the technical improvements, the knowledge and experience acquired by the manufacturers, and the increasing demand which resulted from the accumulation of wealth in the country. By i860, moreover, the protective sentiment was on the wane among American cotton manufacturers, since, as Mr. Webber stated, " the business of cotton manufacture was by that time (1850) so firmly established as to be little affected by changes in legislation in regard to duties on the coarser fabrics required for domestic consumption, to which American machinery had been adapted." 2