1. GRO D2424/12, J. Cave, A History of the Shortwood Baptist Church , ca. 1880, MS., p. 4.

2. See Perry, "The Gloucestershire Woollen Industry, 1100-1690."

3. Mann, Cloth Industry , pp. 175-176, 212.

4. Albion M. Urdank, "Economic Decline in the English Industrial Revolution: The Gloucester Wool Trade, 1800-1840," JEH , XLV (June 1985): 427-428.

5. See Mann, Cloth Industry ; Mann's treatment of the business cycle for West of England broadly corresponds to the national trend; cf. Gayer et al. The Growth and Fluctuation of the British Economy, 1790-1850 , pp. 58, 110.

6. See Derek Gregory, Regional Transformation and Industrial Revolution: A Geography of the Yorkshire Textile Industry (Minneapolis, 1983), pp. 36-37, 104.

7. Mann, Cloth Industry , p. 157.

8. For a treatment of the 1825/26 crisis, see Boyd Hilton, Corn, Cash and Commerce: The Economic Policies of the Tory Governments, 1815-1830 (Oxford, 1977), PP. 202-231; Glos. Jnl ., 19 December 1825 noted the failure of two local banks: that of Messrs. Turner & Morris of Cheltenham and that of Sir Peter Pole & Co. of Stroudwater.

9. Gayer et al., Growth and Fluctuation , p. 173; not that the modest recovery of 1827/28 could not be sustained.

10. See Mann, Cloth Industry , p. 170.

11. Urdank, "Dissenting Community," appendixes 5.1 and 5.2, catalogs of bankruptcy and mill sale references.

12. Glos. Jnl ., 17 October 1829.

13. See Gayer, et al., Growth , p. 244; Mann, Cloth Industry , pp. 175-177; and R. C. O. Matthews, A Study in Trade-Cycle History: Economic Fluctuations in Great Britain, 1833-1842 (Cambridge, 1954), pp. 202-209.

14. See Mann, Cloth Industry , p. 180.

15. Glos. Jnl ., 9 November 1833.

16. Ibid.

17. Ibid., 22 March, 1834.

18. Ibid., 12 July 1834.

19. Ibid., 4 October 1834.

20. Ibid., 1 November 1834.

21. Ibid., 26 December 1835. The recesssion of 1834 had lasted into the early months of 1835; see Glos. Jnl ., 7 February 1835, report on the state of trade.

15. Glos. Jnl ., 9 November 1833.

16. Ibid.

17. Ibid., 22 March, 1834.

18. Ibid., 12 July 1834.

19. Ibid., 4 October 1834.

20. Ibid., 1 November 1834.

21. Ibid., 26 December 1835. The recesssion of 1834 had lasted into the early months of 1835; see Glos. Jnl ., 7 February 1835, report on the state of trade.

15. Glos. Jnl ., 9 November 1833.

16. Ibid.

17. Ibid., 22 March, 1834.

18. Ibid., 12 July 1834.

19. Ibid., 4 October 1834.

20. Ibid., 1 November 1834.

21. Ibid., 26 December 1835. The recesssion of 1834 had lasted into the early months of 1835; see Glos. Jnl ., 7 February 1835, report on the state of trade.

15. Glos. Jnl ., 9 November 1833.

16. Ibid.

17. Ibid., 22 March, 1834.

18. Ibid., 12 July 1834.

19. Ibid., 4 October 1834.

20. Ibid., 1 November 1834.

21. Ibid., 26 December 1835. The recesssion of 1834 had lasted into the early months of 1835; see Glos. Jnl ., 7 February 1835, report on the state of trade.

15. Glos. Jnl ., 9 November 1833.

16. Ibid.

17. Ibid., 22 March, 1834.

18. Ibid., 12 July 1834.

19. Ibid., 4 October 1834.

20. Ibid., 1 November 1834.

21. Ibid., 26 December 1835. The recesssion of 1834 had lasted into the early months of 1835; see Glos. Jnl ., 7 February 1835, report on the state of trade.

15. Glos. Jnl ., 9 November 1833.

16. Ibid.

17. Ibid., 22 March, 1834.

18. Ibid., 12 July 1834.

19. Ibid., 4 October 1834.

20. Ibid., 1 November 1834.

21. Ibid., 26 December 1835. The recesssion of 1834 had lasted into the early months of 1835; see Glos. Jnl ., 7 February 1835, report on the state of trade.

15. Glos. Jnl ., 9 November 1833.

16. Ibid.

17. Ibid., 22 March, 1834.

18. Ibid., 12 July 1834.

19. Ibid., 4 October 1834.

20. Ibid., 1 November 1834.

21. Ibid., 26 December 1835. The recesssion of 1834 had lasted into the early months of 1835; see Glos. Jnl ., 7 February 1835, report on the state of trade.

22. Mann, Cloth Industry , p. 170.

23. See chap. 5.

24. Glos, Jnl ., 15 January 1842, letter of Samuel Smith of Uley, cited at a Bath anti-Corn Law meeting.

25. Ibid., 2 November 1839.

24. Glos, Jnl ., 15 January 1842, letter of Samuel Smith of Uley, cited at a Bath anti-Corn Law meeting.

25. Ibid., 2 November 1839.

26. Urdank, "Economic Decline," p. 428.

27. See Anon., "History of the [Playne] Family Firm," ca. 1923, MS., for a discussion of the bankruptcy of Playne & Smith at Dunkirk Mills, Nailsworth, ca. 1875, a critical failure that marked the decline of the region. William Playne's neighboring firm at Longfords Mill was one of the few to persist into the twentieth century. By the 1920s, because of its reliance on Stroud's traditional indigo dye, the firm found itself unable to compete with German woolens, made with newer chemical dyes.

28. See Urdank, "Dissenting Community," appendixes 5.1 and 5.2, catalogs of bankruptcy and mill sale references.

29. The frequencies measuring turnover, more specifically, consist of notices of Commissions of Bankruptcy awarded, which have been calculated annually from April to March (those awarded between January and March of a calendar year probably reflected a bankruptcy occurring in the previous year); sales of mills and/or machinery belonging to a bankrupt, where no reference to a Commission was found; sales or lettings in which the advertisement specifically mentioned that the owner or occupier was declining trade, although was not a bankrupt; and the sale or letting of all other mills or related property, where the reasons have not been indicated.

30. Mann, Cloth Industry , pp. 132-133.

31. BPP , 24 (1840): 448: "The master weaver," noted a contemporary observer, "rented large premises on which were buildings to hold the looms of his journeymen."

32. Glos. Jnl ., 20 January 1812, Sale of Stonehouse Mills; the premises, however, were occupied by several "undertenants" and not by one firm, which accounts for the especially large capacity of the mill in this early period.

33. Ibid., 21 November 1829.

34. Ibid., 26 December 1829.

35. Ibid., 29 April 1837.

36. Ibid., 1 April 1837. Sale of Machinery.

37. Ibid., 20 March 1820.

38. Ibid., 26 April 1813.

39. Ibid., 5 January 1805, 27 October 1804, 17 March 1806.

40. Ibid., 18 January 1808.

32. Glos. Jnl ., 20 January 1812, Sale of Stonehouse Mills; the premises, however, were occupied by several "undertenants" and not by one firm, which accounts for the especially large capacity of the mill in this early period.

33. Ibid., 21 November 1829.

34. Ibid., 26 December 1829.

35. Ibid., 29 April 1837.

36. Ibid., 1 April 1837. Sale of Machinery.

37. Ibid., 20 March 1820.

38. Ibid., 26 April 1813.

39. Ibid., 5 January 1805, 27 October 1804, 17 March 1806.

40. Ibid., 18 January 1808.

32. Glos. Jnl ., 20 January 1812, Sale of Stonehouse Mills; the premises, however, were occupied by several "undertenants" and not by one firm, which accounts for the especially large capacity of the mill in this early period.

33. Ibid., 21 November 1829.

34. Ibid., 26 December 1829.

35. Ibid., 29 April 1837.

36. Ibid., 1 April 1837. Sale of Machinery.

37. Ibid., 20 March 1820.

38. Ibid., 26 April 1813.

39. Ibid., 5 January 1805, 27 October 1804, 17 March 1806.

40. Ibid., 18 January 1808.

32. Glos. Jnl ., 20 January 1812, Sale of Stonehouse Mills; the premises, however, were occupied by several "undertenants" and not by one firm, which accounts for the especially large capacity of the mill in this early period.

33. Ibid., 21 November 1829.

34. Ibid., 26 December 1829.

35. Ibid., 29 April 1837.

36. Ibid., 1 April 1837. Sale of Machinery.

37. Ibid., 20 March 1820.

38. Ibid., 26 April 1813.

39. Ibid., 5 January 1805, 27 October 1804, 17 March 1806.

40. Ibid., 18 January 1808.

32. Glos. Jnl ., 20 January 1812, Sale of Stonehouse Mills; the premises, however, were occupied by several "undertenants" and not by one firm, which accounts for the especially large capacity of the mill in this early period.

33. Ibid., 21 November 1829.

34. Ibid., 26 December 1829.

35. Ibid., 29 April 1837.

36. Ibid., 1 April 1837. Sale of Machinery.

37. Ibid., 20 March 1820.

38. Ibid., 26 April 1813.

39. Ibid., 5 January 1805, 27 October 1804, 17 March 1806.

40. Ibid., 18 January 1808.

32. Glos. Jnl ., 20 January 1812, Sale of Stonehouse Mills; the premises, however, were occupied by several "undertenants" and not by one firm, which accounts for the especially large capacity of the mill in this early period.

33. Ibid., 21 November 1829.

34. Ibid., 26 December 1829.

35. Ibid., 29 April 1837.

36. Ibid., 1 April 1837. Sale of Machinery.

37. Ibid., 20 March 1820.

38. Ibid., 26 April 1813.

39. Ibid., 5 January 1805, 27 October 1804, 17 March 1806.

40. Ibid., 18 January 1808.

32. Glos. Jnl ., 20 January 1812, Sale of Stonehouse Mills; the premises, however, were occupied by several "undertenants" and not by one firm, which accounts for the especially large capacity of the mill in this early period.

33. Ibid., 21 November 1829.

34. Ibid., 26 December 1829.

35. Ibid., 29 April 1837.

36. Ibid., 1 April 1837. Sale of Machinery.

37. Ibid., 20 March 1820.

38. Ibid., 26 April 1813.

39. Ibid., 5 January 1805, 27 October 1804, 17 March 1806.

40. Ibid., 18 January 1808.

32. Glos. Jnl ., 20 January 1812, Sale of Stonehouse Mills; the premises, however, were occupied by several "undertenants" and not by one firm, which accounts for the especially large capacity of the mill in this early period.

33. Ibid., 21 November 1829.

34. Ibid., 26 December 1829.

35. Ibid., 29 April 1837.

36. Ibid., 1 April 1837. Sale of Machinery.

37. Ibid., 20 March 1820.

38. Ibid., 26 April 1813.

39. Ibid., 5 January 1805, 27 October 1804, 17 March 1806.

40. Ibid., 18 January 1808.

32. Glos. Jnl ., 20 January 1812, Sale of Stonehouse Mills; the premises, however, were occupied by several "undertenants" and not by one firm, which accounts for the especially large capacity of the mill in this early period.

33. Ibid., 21 November 1829.

34. Ibid., 26 December 1829.

35. Ibid., 29 April 1837.

36. Ibid., 1 April 1837. Sale of Machinery.

37. Ibid., 20 March 1820.

38. Ibid., 26 April 1813.

39. Ibid., 5 January 1805, 27 October 1804, 17 March 1806.

40. Ibid., 18 January 1808.

41. See Richard L. Hills, Power in the Industrial Revolution (New York, 1970), p. 92; Mann, Cloth Industry , p. 131; Glos, Jnl ., 19 January 1805, 27 October 1804, 17 March 1806.

42. BPP. Sessional Papers , 24 (1840): 426.

43. References from which these data have been drawn appear in Urdank, "Dissenting Community," appendixes 5.1 and 5.2.

44. The sales and lettings of workshops, because of their small frequencies, have been added to the category of machinery and stock without reference to a mill, which here represents the small clothier and to whom they were clearly related. Similarly, all mill sales—with and without machinery—have been grouped into one category. Sales of machinery at a mill (without the corresponding sale of the mill) and lettings of mills have been left to stand separately. The former indicated the turnover of lessees, who tended to be intermediary clothiers. Mill sales often indicated the turnover of owner and occupiers, but sometimes a mill was sold by its owner after the expiration of a tenant's lease or retirement from trade.

45. Although the text refers to the differences between observed and expected values, table 43 presents only the observed values gathered from the Gloucester Journal ; see Roderick Floud, An Introduction to Quantitative Methods for Historians (Princeton, 1973) PP. 131-133 for the method of calculating expected values.

46. Mules had a minimum of 100 spindles, and jennies were found to have had a maximum of 80 spindles, although 40- to 60-spindle jennies were most common in sales advertisements.

47. Glos. Jnl ., 9 September 1805; Mann, Cloth Industry , pp. 129,

138, 141, 150, gives the following dates for the introduction of these types of machines in the West of England: scribbling and carding engines (1792); the gig mill for finishing (1793); and shearing frames, circa 1800.

48. Glos. Jnl ., 20 March 1824.

49. Ibid., 20 June 1829.

50. Ibid., 2 July 1836.

51. Ibid., 14 July 1832.

48. Glos. Jnl ., 20 March 1824.

49. Ibid., 20 June 1829.

50. Ibid., 2 July 1836.

51. Ibid., 14 July 1832.

48. Glos. Jnl ., 20 March 1824.

49. Ibid., 20 June 1829.

50. Ibid., 2 July 1836.

51. Ibid., 14 July 1832.

48. Glos. Jnl ., 20 March 1824.

49. Ibid., 20 June 1829.

50. Ibid., 2 July 1836.

51. Ibid., 14 July 1832.

52. See Urdank, "Economic Decline," p. 42.9.

53. Glos. Jnl ., 21 July 1813.

54. Ibid., 4 October 1828.

55. Ibid., 6 March 1820.

56. Ibid., 16 June 1832.

57. Ibid., 17 January 1835.

53. Glos. Jnl ., 21 July 1813.

54. Ibid., 4 October 1828.

55. Ibid., 6 March 1820.

56. Ibid., 16 June 1832.

57. Ibid., 17 January 1835.

53. Glos. Jnl ., 21 July 1813.

54. Ibid., 4 October 1828.

55. Ibid., 6 March 1820.

56. Ibid., 16 June 1832.

57. Ibid., 17 January 1835.

53. Glos. Jnl ., 21 July 1813.

54. Ibid., 4 October 1828.

55. Ibid., 6 March 1820.

56. Ibid., 16 June 1832.

57. Ibid., 17 January 1835.

53. Glos. Jnl ., 21 July 1813.

54. Ibid., 4 October 1828.

55. Ibid., 6 March 1820.

56. Ibid., 16 June 1832.

57. Ibid., 17 January 1835.

58. Anon., "History of the [Playne] Family Firm."

59. Ibid.

58. Anon., "History of the [Playne] Family Firm."

59. Ibid.

60. PRO B3/629, Bankruptcy Examination of Edward J. Blackwell, Woolen Manfacturer, Nailsworth; Commission awarded July 14, 1829. Blackwell had occupied Egypt Mill.

61. Glos. Jnl ., 14 March 1829, sale by Nathaniel Wathen of his machinery at Hope Mills.

62. A possible exception was Stonehouse Mills, near Stroud, which in 1812. contained weaving shops, and was capable of employing between £20,000 and £60,000 of capital ( Glos. Jnl ., 14 March 1812.). When the machinery was sold in 1814, it included twenty-six 80-spindle jennies, ten 80-spindle reels, thirteen new shearing frames, and several narrow-looms and broadlooms ( Glos. Jnl ., 3 January 1814). These instruments clearly belonged to the principal lessee and his undertenants; a mill of such capacity could not be run at this early date, except with the resources of several intermediary firms. Such a pattern of mill occupation approximated the one prevailing in the Manchester cotton industry; see R. Lloyd-Jones and A. A. LeRoux, "The Size of Firms in the Cotton Industry: Manchester, 1815-1841," Ec. HR ., 2.d ser., XXXIII (February 1980): 73.

63. Urdank, "Economic Decline," p. 429.

64. Gloucester had actually kept pace with Yorkshire in powerlooms by 1838; thereafter, Gloucester clothiers who remained in businesss adopted them even more widely. In aggregate, however, Gloucester continued to lag behind Yorkshire, although not always on a per capita basis; in 1861 Gloucester regained a per capita parity but was rapidly outpaced by Yorkshire from 1867; see Mann, Cloth Industry , p. 188 and the tables on p. 220.

65. Glos. Jnl ., 22 September 1815.

66. See Mann, Cloth Industry , pp. 127, 188.

67. Glos. Jnl ., 4 October 1828, at Dyehouse Mills; ibid., 20 September 1828, Nathaniel Driver's stock at Peghouse near Stroud.

66. See Mann, Cloth Industry , pp. 127, 188.

67. Glos. Jnl ., 4 October 1828, at Dyehouse Mills; ibid., 20 September 1828, Nathaniel Driver's stock at Peghouse near Stroud.

68. Stonehouse Mills, cited above, n. 55, was an exception.

69. Glos. Jnl ., 27 April 1818 and 6 March 1820, respectively.

70. Ibid., 9 June 1827, 2 August 1828, and 6 March 1830, respectively.

71. Ibid., 21 July 1827, ''Loom Factories," a notice placed by the executive committee of the weavers' union.

69. Glos. Jnl ., 27 April 1818 and 6 March 1820, respectively.

70. Ibid., 9 June 1827, 2 August 1828, and 6 March 1830, respectively.

71. Ibid., 21 July 1827, ''Loom Factories," a notice placed by the executive committee of the weavers' union.

69. Glos. Jnl ., 27 April 1818 and 6 March 1820, respectively.

70. Ibid., 9 June 1827, 2 August 1828, and 6 March 1830, respectively.

71. Ibid., 21 July 1827, ''Loom Factories," a notice placed by the executive committee of the weavers' union.

72. Mann, Cloth Industry , p. 163, notes that the building of new factories and the extension of old ones "went on vigorously."

73. Anon., "History of the [Playne] Family Firm." Between 1811 and 1814, capital increased from £3,000 to £4,000, following the transfer of management from Martha Playne to her two sons, William and Peter. The firm was said to have prospered at the same rate of growth until 1824.

74. PRO B3/629, Bankruptcy Examination of Edward J. Blackwell, Woolen Manufacturer. At his bankruptcy examination, Blackwell, Egypt Mill's previous tenant, indicated that two pair of stocks, one gig mill, and four waterwheels had been constructed by the owner, Samuel Webb, while "the other part has since been erected at the joint expense of Mr. Webb and myself."

75. Glos. Jnl ., 14 July 1829.

76. See Esther Moir, "Marling and Evans, King's Stanley and Ebley Mills," Textile History , I (1971).

77. Urdank, "Economic Decline," p. 428, n. 9.

78. Gregory, Regional Transformation , pp. 72-74.

79. Mann, Cloth Industry , p. 190; ibid., p. 74.

78. Gregory, Regional Transformation , pp. 72-74.

79. Mann, Cloth Industry , p. 190; ibid., p. 74.

80. Gregory, Regional Transformation , pp. 200-201; in the East Riding, he notes, the stream only "trickled." Steam engines began to substitute for water power in the West Riding much later: by the 1820s and then largely in response to conditions of overcrowding on rural streams; see D. T. Jenkins, The West Riding Wool Textile Industry, 1770-1835: A Study of Fixed Capital Formation (Edington, 1975), P. 47.

81. Ibid., Gregory, p. 203; ibid., Jenkins, pp. 76-77.

80. Gregory, Regional Transformation , pp. 200-201; in the East Riding, he notes, the stream only "trickled." Steam engines began to substitute for water power in the West Riding much later: by the 1820s and then largely in response to conditions of overcrowding on rural streams; see D. T. Jenkins, The West Riding Wool Textile Industry, 1770-1835: A Study of Fixed Capital Formation (Edington, 1975), P. 47.

81. Ibid., Gregory, p. 203; ibid., Jenkins, pp. 76-77.

82. BPP , XLII (1839): 1-799, "Accounts and Papers."

83. See Mann, Cloth Industry , p. 186 and Gregory, Regional Transformation , p. 72.

84. Ibid.; Mann, p. 190. The earliest reference to a steam mill in Gloucester, in fact, occurred in 1818 in the sale of J. C. Hamblin's property. An earlier reference for the West Country occurred in 1815 in the sale of a 30-horsepower Boulton & Watt at Radstock, Somerset, but

perhaps the earliest took place at Chippenham, Wiltshire, where a factory, four stories high with rooms fifty feet by thirty-two feet, and housing six to ten machines, was said to "be driven by either steam or water." See Glos. Jnl ., 2 April 1804, 22 May 1815, and 12 November 1818; see also Albion M. Urdank, "Custom, Conflict and Traditional Authority in the Gloucester Weaver Strike of 1825," Journal of British Studies 25, (April 1986): 195, n. 7.

83. See Mann, Cloth Industry , p. 186 and Gregory, Regional Transformation , p. 72.

84. Ibid.; Mann, p. 190. The earliest reference to a steam mill in Gloucester, in fact, occurred in 1818 in the sale of J. C. Hamblin's property. An earlier reference for the West Country occurred in 1815 in the sale of a 30-horsepower Boulton & Watt at Radstock, Somerset, but

perhaps the earliest took place at Chippenham, Wiltshire, where a factory, four stories high with rooms fifty feet by thirty-two feet, and housing six to ten machines, was said to "be driven by either steam or water." See Glos. Jnl ., 2 April 1804, 22 May 1815, and 12 November 1818; see also Albion M. Urdank, "Custom, Conflict and Traditional Authority in the Gloucester Weaver Strike of 1825," Journal of British Studies 25, (April 1986): 195, n. 7.

85. For further discussion, see below.

86. See table 42.

87. See Robert B. Gordon, "Cost and Use of Water Power during Industrialization in New England and Great Britain: A Geological Interpretation," Ec. HR , 2d ser., XXXVI (May 1983).

88. See Stanley Chapman, "The Cost of Power in the Industrial Revolution in Britain: The Case of the Textile Industry," Midland History , I (Spring 1971): 6-8, 12-13.

89. See Tann, "Employment of Power" and Gordon, "The Cost and Use of Water Power."

90. See Chapman, "The Cost of Power," pp. 8-11, especially the examples of Thackery and Arkwright.

91. Urdank, "Economic Decline," p. 429, n. 14.

92. Ibid., n. 13; Chapman, "The Cost of Power."

91. Urdank, "Economic Decline," p. 429, n. 14.

92. Ibid., n. 13; Chapman, "The Cost of Power."

93. Anon., "History of the [Playne] Family Firm": "The new north mill [at Dunkirk Mills]," complained a younger member of the Playne family ''has never been fully used. It is absolutely necessary that the heavy, fast-running looms should . . . be placed on the ground floor, and driven by steam at a perfectly regular speed and not by the irregular and varying water power."

94. See Urdank, "Economic Decline," pp. 430-433. Path analysis, a form of regression modeling, was used to distinguish direct and indirect causal flows and to compare the relative efficiency of large- and small-engine mills. Steam powered mills were selected from the catalog of 260 Gloucester Journal references in Urdank, "Dissenting Community," appendix 5.2. Table 46 (this chapter) contains all mills for which sales notices specifically indicated the amount of steam horsepower employed, and these numbered thirty-four. Twelve other sales notices referred to steam engines but gave no horsepower data and thus could not be included. The appearance of these data, moreover, occurs randomly throughout these notices. If we exclude the first 147 notices, which appeared prior to the advent of the earliest known steam engine in Gloucester (e.g., November 1818), the sample of thirty-four then represents 30.08 percent of the remaining sales notices, while the upper-bound

sample of forty-six represents 40.7 percent. A sample of thirty-four, in any case, is not unduly small, despite the fact that the true universe of steam-powered mills remains unknown. Adopting a confidence interval of 90 percent, with an error range of plus or minus 3.5 horsepower, and using the standard deviation of 15.245 of the thirty-four steam engines in our sample, we obtain an expected sample size of 34.066. See Blalock, Social Statistics , pp. 213-215 for the method of estimating sample sizes when the standard error of the population is unknown. Blalock indicates that the real difficulty in making such estimations comes when estimating the standard error of the population; according to him, we have to rely on a "best guess" or a pilot study if practicable. In our case, the standard deviation of the thirty-four mills is better than a "best guess" and at least as good as a pilot study.

95. A to-horsepower engine, used to pump water for waterwheels, would not produce to horsepower in the machinery, according to a contemporary expert; to produce to horsepower of energy would require instead 16 to 20 horsepower. See R. L. Hills and A. J. Pacey, "The Measurement of Power in Early Steam-driven Textile Mills," Technology and Culture , XIII, (January 1972): 31.

96. BPP , XXIV (1840): 362; W. A. Miles, the Assistant Commissioner for Gloucester, sent to investigate the condition of handloom weavers, pointed to the concentration of capital and the growth in productive capacity of the remaining mills.

97. Ibid., p. 435.

98. Ibid., p. 434.

96. BPP , XXIV (1840): 362; W. A. Miles, the Assistant Commissioner for Gloucester, sent to investigate the condition of handloom weavers, pointed to the concentration of capital and the growth in productive capacity of the remaining mills.

97. Ibid., p. 435.

98. Ibid., p. 434.

96. BPP , XXIV (1840): 362; W. A. Miles, the Assistant Commissioner for Gloucester, sent to investigate the condition of handloom weavers, pointed to the concentration of capital and the growth in productive capacity of the remaining mills.

97. Ibid., p. 435.

98. Ibid., p. 434.

99. See above, n. 93; by 1870, the date of the quotation cited, the "fast-running [power]looms," referred to by the younger Playne, had clearly replaced the handloom weavers.

100. BPP , XXIV (1840): 386-387: W. A. Miles calculated that of the 3,000 weavers remaining in Gloucester in 1839, only 2,666 were needed to meet current production levels, leaving a surplus of 334, or 16 percent of an outdoor weaver population of 2,089.

101. See n. 127, 130, 132 and text, for a comparison of the number of spindles, and below for the mule's impact on labor.

102. J. W. Scott and L. A. Tilly, "Women's Work and the Family in nineteenth Century Europe," Comparative Studies in Society and History , XVII (1975): 46.

103. GRO, P181/OV7/1. Horsley Parish Census Enumerator's List, ca. 1811.

104. "There were many master weavers who were rather respectable men and who kept four to six looms in their houses if they had room,"

Mann quotes one contemporary source. "They kept journeymen and women and gave the journeyfolk about two-thirds the price of the work." Quoted in Mann, Cloth Industry , pp. 229-230.

105. Glos. Jnl ., 24 February 1817; see also Glos. Jnl ., 20 August 1836, sale of two tenements at Wotton with a four-loom weaving shed attached to one of them.

106. Craftsmen, such as carpenters, masons, and blacksmiths, have been grouped separately from weavers; and both categories have been distinguished from laborers. The enumerator's list did not distinguish between agricultural laborers and day laborers employed in the cloth trade.

107. Testing the difference in proportions between craftsmen-landlords and weaver-landlords, Z = 1.200, Prob Z > 1.200 = 0.12; the probability, in other words, of obtaining a Z value greater than or equal to 1.2 is 88.0 percent, which falls below the usual 0.05 level, suggesting no difference, but is an acceptably high level of significance to suggest the beginning of erosion of the status of master weaver.

108. Nor was there a significant difference in mean household size between any occupational group. By this date, journeymen and apprentices were unlikely to have lived in the master's house, especially if the master rented his work premises.

109. This point is worth emphasizing because we have become accustomed erroneously to regard country weavers as mere cottagers. See, for instance, Hans Medick, "The Proto-industrial Family Economy: The Structural Function of Household and Family During the Transition From Peasant Society to Industrial Capitalism," Social History , I (1976): 291-315; Buchanan Sharp, In Contempt of All Authority: Rural Artisans and Riot in the West of England, 1588-1660 (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, 1980) and Charles Tilly, As Sociology Meets History (New York, 1981).

110. See Mann, Cloth Industry , pp. 143-149 for an account of early weaver resistance to repeal of the apprenticeship statutes.

111. See the debates among the weavers in the Glos. Jnl ., 21 March, 4 and 11 April 1829.

112. GRO, P181/OV7/1, Horsley Census List, ca. 1811; PRO Home Office 107/362, 1841 census enumerators' lists.

113. See Scott and Tilly, "Women's Work," p. 52, quoting Neil Smelser, Social Change in the Industrial Revolution: An Application of Theory to the British Cotton Industry (Chicago, 1959), p. 188.

114. Gloucester City Library, The Hyett Collection, Gloucestershire Tracts , ser. C, III, 1832-1882, Speech on the Factories Regulation Bill, 1833.

115. Glos. Jnl ., 21 July 1827, "Loom Factories."

116. Functional differentiation of occupations accompanied the new pattern of labor recruitment; see Neil Smelser, Social Change in the Industrial Revolution ; for a different finding, cf. Patrick Joyce, Work, Society and Politics: The Culture of the Factory in Later Victorian England (New Brunswick, N.J., 1981), pp. 53ff., who argues for the persistence of work and family ties in the factory after 1840. For a summary of research on this issue, see E. H. Pleck, "Two Worlds in One: Work and Family," Journal of Social History , X (1976).

117. BPP , XXIV (1840): 445-449.

118. See Scott and Tilly, "Women's Work," pp. 60-61, the case of Francesca F.

119. Clothworkers included quillers, burlers, reelers, pickers, and warpers.

120. BPP , XXIV (1840): 400-401, evidence given by Peter Playne. Male factory weavers earned 11s. per week, and male outdoor weavers earned

121. This was especially true in the case of spinning; see Joyce, Work, Society and Politics , p. 55 for the Lancashire cotton trade.

122. BPP ., XXIV (1840): 374.

123. See Ivy Pinchbeck, Women Workers and the Industrial Revolution, 1750-1850 (New York, 1969), pp. 121, 126, 162-166.

124. In a difference-of-proportions test, Z = 6.33, significant at 0.00 probability.

125. The 1841 census for Horsley parish listed thirty-eight women and sixty-seven men as weavers.

126. BPP , XXIV (1840): 377; the proportion was 184 in 694, or 26.5 percent; Z = 2.068, significant at the 0.02 level.

127. H. Catling, "The Evolution of Spinning," in J. G. Jenkins, ed., The Wool Textile Industry in Great Britain (London, 1972), p. 110.

128. GRO, P181/OV7/1, MS. Census List, Horsley Parish.

129. BPP , XXIV (1840): 337.

130. Catling, "The Evolution of Spinning," p. 110.

131. The 1841 census for Horsley listed six males and fourteen females as spinners.

132. Catling, "The Evolution of Spinning," p. 110.

133. Mann, Cloth Industry , pp. 140, 229. Although the fly shuttle shortened the average weaving time, some weavers still took longer than on the double loom.

134. Ibid., see P. Ellis, "The Techniques of Weaving," in Jenkins, ed., Wool Textile Industry , pp. 125-127 for a careful description of handlooms.

133. Mann, Cloth Industry , pp. 140, 229. Although the fly shuttle shortened the average weaving time, some weavers still took longer than on the double loom.

134. Ibid., see P. Ellis, "The Techniques of Weaving," in Jenkins, ed., Wool Textile Industry , pp. 125-127 for a careful description of handlooms.

135. See below, chap. 7, the 1825 weaver strike.

136. Ibid.

135. See below, chap. 7, the 1825 weaver strike.

136. Ibid.

137. Glos. Jnl ., 20 June 1825.

138. Synchronization was the crucial variable. See E. P. Thompson, "Time, Work-Discipline and Industrial Capitalism," Past and Present , 38 (1967): 76-86; cf. David Landes, Revolution in Time: Clocks and the Making of the Modern World (Cambridge, Mass., 1983).

139. BPP , XXIV (1840): 389; the combined productivity of males and females was 1,974 yards per weaver per annum. The male rate was 52.8 percent of the total, while the female rate was 47.1 percent. Male weavers numbered 655, and female weavers numbered 167. In a difference-of-proportions test, Z = 2.533, significant at the 0.005 probability level.

140. Quoted by Miles, in BPP , XXIV (1840): 389.

141. Warping, for instance, required "care and art," and warpers had to keep pace with the weaver; piecers, similarly, followed the pace set by the spinner. Since warping and piecing were essentially female occupations, women workers tended to imbibe factory discipline indirectly, through structural dependence on male work rhythms.

142. BPP , XXIV (1840): 389.

143. Mann, Cloth Industry , pp. 106-107.

144. Master weavers tried less sucessfully to expedite the journeyman's work; see ibid., pp. 229-230 and below, Thomas Cole's comments on journeymen weavers.

143. Mann, Cloth Industry , pp. 106-107.

144. Master weavers tried less sucessfully to expedite the journeyman's work; see ibid., pp. 229-230 and below, Thomas Cole's comments on journeymen weavers.

145. John Foster, Class Struggles and the Industrial Revolution: Early Industrial Capitalism in Three English Towns (London, 1977), PP. 91-93, cites the impact of disease, which was, however, more the consequence of urbanization. The same factory inspectors, Horner and Woolrich, who condemned northern cotton manufacturers, gave Gloucester factories a favorable report; see Mann, Cloth Industry , p. 247.

146. BPP , XXIV (1840): 389.

147. Ibid., p. 415.

146. BPP , XXIV (1840): 389.

147. Ibid., p. 415.

148. See table 51 for a survey of weavers' attitudes toward the factory.

149. BPP , XXIV (1840): 415.

150. On the symbiosis between deference and empathy, see chap. 7, section on the 1825 weaver strike.

151. Other master weavers reacted competitively. Their wish to retain control over their craft produced considerable militancy among them, as we shall see. However, many also wished to become clothiers and regarded the factory system as a threat to this ambition.

152. GRO D2424/3/658, Shortwood Baptist Church Roll, baptized September 28, 1806 and excluded October 9, 1834. His brother and father, both named Jonathan Cole, were weavers and Baptists: D2424/3/ 385 and 763.

153. See Mann, Cloth Industry , p. 241, on the strike at Playne's in 1834.

154. See Chap. 7.

155. BPP , XXIV (1840): 415.

156. See tables 52 to 54.

157. BPP , XXIV (1840): 442: Cole returned to outdoor work, this time as a journeyman weaver, but still could not find enough employment and had to resort to potato digging, for which he was paid 4d. per bag; his wages were paid in potatotes instead of money, that is, in truck.

158. Ibid., pp. 417-419. The master weaver deducted from the journeyman's gross earnings 3d. for materials and 2d. for fetching and carrying back the work. Miles, the parliamentary commissioner, also reduced the gross earnings of the master weaver by 16 percent, in order to adjust for the effect of surplus labor.

157. BPP , XXIV (1840): 442: Cole returned to outdoor work, this time as a journeyman weaver, but still could not find enough employment and had to resort to potato digging, for which he was paid 4d. per bag; his wages were paid in potatotes instead of money, that is, in truck.

158. Ibid., pp. 417-419. The master weaver deducted from the journeyman's gross earnings 3d. for materials and 2d. for fetching and carrying back the work. Miles, the parliamentary commissioner, also reduced the gross earnings of the master weaver by 16 percent, in order to adjust for the effect of surplus labor.

159. See chap. 7, the 1825 weaver strike.

160. "Colts" were youths who were only partially initiated into the trade and served master weavers as assistants. The surplus of colts made it easier for clothiers to establish loom factories, since colts usually welcomed the chance to learn all of the "mysteries" of the trade. See Glos. Jnl ., 21 March 1829, a weaver's rebuttal against the claims made by the Association of [Master] Weavers.

161. See BPP , XXIV (1840): 442-446, 439 for a summary of Miles's other findings.

162. Figure 18 is based on a sample of weekly prices drawn from the Gloucester Journal ; one week per month was selected, and a yearly average based on twelve months was computed and plotted in two time series, the regressions of which are also given. For treatments of the agricultural depression, see Hilton, Corn, Cash and Commerce , chaps. III-V, and Pamela Horns, The Rural World: Social Change in the English Countryside, 1780-1850 (London, 1980), pp. 71-83.

163. BPP , XXIV (1840): 421, budget of James Risby; rent, at 9 percent of the total budget, was the next largest item. Wheat prices tended to correlate with the movement of prices of other consumables; see R. D. Lee, "Short-Term Variations: Vital Rates, Prices and Weather," in Wrigley and Schofield, Population History of England , p. 353.

164. This finding partly affirms the view advanced by Deane and Cole that the trend in living standards rose at least until 1825, although their optimism regarding the period of the Napoleonic wars seems question-

able; see P. Deane and W. A. Cole, British Economic Growth, 1688-1959: Trends and Structure (Cambridge, 1962), p. 27, and below, n. 169. The most recent restatement of the optimists' case dates the ostensible rise in living standards only from 1820; see Peter Lindert and Jeffrey G. Williamson, "English Workers' Living Standards: a New Look," Ec.HR , 2d ser., XXXVI (1983); however, see a careful critique and downward revision of their estimates in N. F. R. Crafts, British Economic Growth during the Industrial Revolution (Oxford, 1985), p. 101.

165. BPP , XXIV (1840): 459, 458ff. for all other comments related to truck unless otherwise indicated. Littleton, an M.P. from Straffordshire, reported that the difference was between 20 and 25 percent; see Glos. Jnl ., 24 April 1830.

166. Ibid.; Glos. Jnl ., 5 May 1832: Prosecutions were made under the Act of first and second William IV, clause 37; for weavers debating the origin of truck, see Glos. Jnl ., 21 March and 4 and 11 April 1829.

165. BPP , XXIV (1840): 459, 458ff. for all other comments related to truck unless otherwise indicated. Littleton, an M.P. from Straffordshire, reported that the difference was between 20 and 25 percent; see Glos. Jnl ., 24 April 1830.

166. Ibid.; Glos. Jnl ., 5 May 1832: Prosecutions were made under the Act of first and second William IV, clause 37; for weavers debating the origin of truck, see Glos. Jnl ., 21 March and 4 and 11 April 1829.

167. BPP , XXIV (1840): 459; evidence of Mr. Ross, a Woodchester shopkeeper.

168. See Taylor, ed., Standard of Living , p. xlv.

169. The point of controversy is whether wage levels could have risen at all during the war. Deane and Cole have implied that both nominal and real wages had increased between 1795 and 1816; see ibid., p. xliii. Crafts has shown that their real wage estimates for 1780-1820 were very nearly correct, while those of Phelps-Brown and Hopkins and Lindert and Williamson were far too low; see Crafts, British Economic Growth , p. 103, table 5.5.

168. See Taylor, ed., Standard of Living , p. xlv.

169. The point of controversy is whether wage levels could have risen at all during the war. Deane and Cole have implied that both nominal and real wages had increased between 1795 and 1816; see ibid., p. xliii. Crafts has shown that their real wage estimates for 1780-1820 were very nearly correct, while those of Phelps-Brown and Hopkins and Lindert and Williamson were far too low; see Crafts, British Economic Growth , p. 103, table 5.5.

170. Mann, Cloth Industry , pp. 250-251.

171. See Thompson, Making of the English Working Class , p. 203 and R. M. Hartwell and S. Engerman, "Models of Immiseration: The Theoretical Basis of Pessimism," in Taylor, ed., The Standard of Living , pp. 190-191.

172. See Wrigley, "The Process of Modernization."