CAMBRIDGE A-LEVEL HISTORY

9489/1/2: MODERN EUROPEAN OPTION

THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION IN BRITAIN, 1750-1850

SYLLABUS OUTLINE

KEY QUESTIONS
1. What were the causes of the Industrial Revolution?

2. Why was there a rapid growth of industrialisation after 1780?

3. Why, and with what consequences, did urbanisation result from industrialisation?

4. Why, and with what consequences, did industrialisation result in popular protest and

political change?

SPECIFIED CONTENT

1. CAUSES AND DEVELOPMENT OF BRITISH INDUSTRIALISATION

•• Availability of raw materials, e.g. iron and coal

•• Development of the factory system: steam power and machines

•• Developments in transport: canals, roads, railways and steam ships

•• Growth of markets (domestic and international) and growth of free trade

•• Growth of towns and impact on living conditions, e.g. housing and health

1
2. IMPACT/ EFFECTS OF BRITISH INDUSTRIALISATION

•• Working conditions, e.g. child labour, hours, pay and safety

•• Impact on different social classes

•• Reactions to mechanisation and economic change, e.g. Luddites and Captain Swing riots

•• Demands for political reform including Chartists

•• Origins of organised labour, e.g. trade unions and cooperative societies

•• Government responses to the consequences of industrialisation: early moves towards

regulation and control of working and living conditions

BACKGROUND TO THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION

THE AGRICULTURAL REVOLUTION

The first Industrial revolution began in Great Britain between 1750 to 1860.

In the traditional view this was an unexpected and rapid transformation of key industrial

sectors by mechanical innovations. The key sectors transformed were the cotton textile

industry, the power producing industry (with the steam engine and new energy sources in

coal), the iron and steel industry, and eventually transportation with the introduction of

railroads. The traditional account stresses that there were a few key innovations in each

sector. These innovations led to the emergence of factory production and large scale modern

industry. This new industrial economy in turn led to the imposition of factory discipline on

workers and to their ultimate deskilling to the role of machine tenders. It also created social

changes such as the proletarianization of much of the population, urbanization, and great

accumulations of capital and hence great inequality in incomes.

2
There were several factors that combined to make Great Britain an ideal place for

Industrialisation. First, it was the Agricultural revolution of the 18th century that a created

favourable climate for industrialisation.

The Agricultural revolution (Pre industrial/ Traditional society) refers to specific social

attributes and forms of political and cultural organization that were prevalent before the

advent of the Industrial revolution. According to Rostow, the social structure was

hierarchical and the essence of the Agricultural revolution was that it possessed a low ceiling

of attainable output per head because of the backward nature of technology. The Agricultural

revolution was marked by limited production and there was limited division of labour hence

production was simple. The communities were mostly rural and there was limited variation

among the social classes. The ownership of land gave social status and also underpinned

social hierarchy. The Agricultural revolution was marked was marked by new methods on

technology (crop rotation).

In Britain, agricultural revolution resulted in the abolition of serfdom. However, the rural

population which was no longer employed provided a potential industrial workforce. Enough

food was provided to feed large populations in towns. It led to an increase in population

which was an impetus to industrial revolution. The Agrarian revolution was characterized

by the Enclosure system which was the consolidation of many small farms into large farms.

This process left many people homeless and jobless hence these people would provide

workforce of the Industrial revolution. Manufacturing counted for a significant share of its

total economic activity, about one fourth of France‟s gross national product and almost 40

percent of Britain‟s in the early 18th century. In the 13th century, Italian craftsmen learned

how to make silk cloth and their techniques spread north of the Alps in the 15th and 16th

centuries.

3
The technology of silk weaving changed as well, most dramatically with the invention of the

Jacquard loom in the 1720s. Calico cloths from India created a sensation when first

introduced in later 17th century England. They were quickly imitated by British

manufacturers who effectively established an altogether new industry. A stream of inventions

thus changed manufacturing over the early modern period but the most important changes

that the period witnessed had to do with the organization of work rather than its technology.

Cloth merchants supplied villagers with raw materials and they transported goods from one

stage of production to the next. They finally marketed the finished product, taking as well the

largest share of the profits. Historians have applied several names to this process. The term

cottage industry accurately captures the fact that this system of manufacturing left

unchanged the basic conditions of its workers‟ lives. Spinners, weavers and others continued

to live in small villages and continued to work according to their own preferences, as

independent contractors who owned their equipment.

Historians have also spoken of this process as proto industrialization, a term that

emphasizes the new economic relationships and expectations, as well as the demographic

consequences created by this system. The proto industrial workforce was in some sense a

proletariat, whose economic fate rested with others. Historians have suggested that these

workers were in effect learning the habits that they would eventually need to work in the

factories of the nineteenth century. The rise of cottage industry also changed European

buying. Historian Jan de Vries argued that 17th and 18th century families were working

harder than they had in the past in exchange for the ability to buy more goods. Cottage

industry allowed women and children to earn cash incomes and it converted what had been

the family‟s leisure time, especially the slow phases of the agricultural cycle into cash as

well.

4
Historians have turned to probate inventories to demonstrate the breadth of the consumer

revolution that these centuries brought to England, the Netherlands, France and Germany.

Even backward areas showed the effects of these changes, with families buying mirrors,

clocks, brightly printed clothing, prints and a variety of other manufactured goods. The

notable effects of the pre- industrial society were most visible in the developing cities of the

age. The largest city of early modern Europe, London by itself concentrated about 16 percent

of England‟s population.

1. CAUSES AND DEVELOPMENT OF INDUSTRIALISATION

(a) AVAILABILITY OF RAW MATERIALS:

(IRON AND COAL)

Britain had vast supply of mineral resources used to run industrial machines, such as coal.

Since Britain is a relatively small country, these resources could be transported quickly and at

a reasonable cost. The British government passed laws that protected private property and

placed few restrictions on private business owners. Britain‟s merchant marine could transport

goods to foreign markets. Lastly, Great Britain‟s colonial empire created a ready supply of

consumers to purchase its manufactured goods.

Coal played an especially important role in the iron industry, which constituted the fourth

strand of industrialisation. Iron and steel had been important to European technology since

the Middle Ages, but expensive production processes limited their uses. Like other early

modern manufacturing, iron making relied on the experience and skill of a mass of individual

artisans, whose small foundries permitted close inspection of each piece that they produced.

Steel was even more clearly a specialised product, requiring superior iron ore found mainly in

Sweden; forged by hand, it was reserved for such uses as as weaponry, and was much too

expensive for more mundane products.

5
Starting in the 18th century, the availability of coal and steam engines to power blowers and

hammers stimulated a sequence of new iron making processes, and these dramatically

changed the industry‟s economics. Cheap iron, for instance, allowed for the creation of new

machine tools, and when combined with steam power, these made possible mechanised

production of numerous products that once been made by hand. Steam power and coal fuel

allowed the potter Josiah Wedgewood (1730-795) to establish mass production processes in

making porcelain, until then a luxury good. Inventors began to think about the possibilities of

using iron in buildings and ships. By 800, it was clear that dramatic change was likely to

affect all domains of the economy which would transform new areas of economic activity.

(b) DEVELOPMENT OF THE FACTORY SYSTEM:

(STEAM POWER AND MACHINES)

The commencement of the Industrial revolution is closely linked to a small number of

innovations and inventions made during the second half the 18th century. In textiles, cotton

spinning using Richard Arkwright‟s Water frame, James Hargreaves‟ Spinning Jenny

and Samuel Compton‟s Spinning Mule. This worked as a combination of the Spinning

Jenny and the Water frame. This was officially launched in 1769. This innovation made

cotton spinning faster. John Kay made one of the key inventions that started what most

historians would call the Flying Shuttle. This was a new device for weaving. The Flying

Shuttle was an arrangement by which the shuttle was automatically thrown from one side of

the loom to the other so that one man could weave the widest cloth desired. In this way,

weaving of any sort became faster though there still remained a disparity in speed between

weaving and spinning. This made weaving much faster.

6
A few years before that, Abraham Darby discovered how to make steel using coal instead of

wood, actually, coke instead of charcoal. This allowed for a greater output of cheap steel,

since coal was more plentiful than wood at that time in England. The Flying Shuttle set into

motion a chain of events that revolutionized the textile industry. With the Flying Shuttle,

cotton workers were able to weave so much faster that they ran out of yarn.

James Hargreaves exploited this opportunity by inventing a machine that multiplied the

amount of yarn produced, the Spinning Jenny. The Spinning Jenny was a multiplied

spinning wheel though it remained a domestic apparatus. It resulted in the increased

importance of cotton. However, its serious defect was that it could not span a strong thread

which gave rise to another intervention of Richard Arkwright. Richard Arkwright also saw

an opportunity knocking. It was known as the Water frame because it was propelled by water

power. It could span a strong thread and made possible the production of satisfactory all

cotton fabric. This resulted in the factory system set up at Cromford, Debyshire and

Lancashire. However, the Water Frame was too large and too expensive to put in a cottage.

Arkwright had to build a factory to house his machine. He is thus considered the founder of

modern factory system when the cotton weavers first adopted the Flying Shuttle.

In the textile sector such mills became the model for the organisation of human labour in

factories, epitomised by Cottonopolis, the name given to the vast collection of cotton mills,

factories and administration offices based in Manchester. The development of new relevant

technology equally lay at the centre of a successful industrial revolution in all Europe. Such

research and expertise was first nurtured in Great Britain and then it spread to other European

countries. Actually British technology was exported to France, Belgium and Germany.

English exports and capital provided the French with the technology to use coke in the

smelting of pig iron especially after 1815.

7
Giovanni Bronca suggested using steam to propel a turbine, people had been experimenting

with steam power. Bronca was followed by the Marquis of Worcester in England, Denis

Papin in in France and Thomas Savery in England. With the invention of steam power,

James Watt improved the condenser of the steam engine which enabled rapid development

of efficient semi- automated factories on a previously unimaginable scale in places where

waterpower was not available. Watt teamed up with Mathew Boulton in 1781 to

manufacture his new engine. Boulton had access to the technology needed to make finely

machined parts that gave the Watt engine greater efficiency and durability. Boulton

convinced Watt to convert the engine from a simple pump to a device producing rotary

power, the first steam engine that could power other machinery. Boulton and Watt

constructed 496 steam engines with 164 driving reciprocating pumps, 24 serving blast

furnaces and 308 powering mill machinery. Most of the engines generated from 5 to 10 horse

power (7,5 km) The development of machine tools such as the lathe, planning and shaping

machines powered by these engines, enabled all the metal parts of the engine to be easily and

accurately cut. By 1781, the Industrial revolution in England had been completed.

The application of steam engines to cotton mills and iron works enabled steam engines to be

built in places that were most convenient because other resources were available. The use of

steam power was one of the most important features industrialisation. Water power then

steam power enabled larger and more powerful machines to be built and this began to

transform industry in the late 18th century. In Britain, James Watt made a vital breakthrough

in developing better steam engines.

8
Steam power began the process of revolutionising agriculture and industry. Around the

middle of the 19th century, steam ploughs and threshing machines were introduced on farms,

the first step towards modern agricultural machinery. Steam power also applied to machines

in factories where it resulted in huge increase in both productivity and the range of jobs that

could be performed by machines rather than by hand.

Steam engines soon spread to continental Europe where engineers developed their own

inventions. Coal miners in France and Germany used Watt‟s steam engines and trade went in

both directions as British factory owners bought continental machines. Belgium also became

the first country in mainland Europe to industrialise. Germany also established the Zollverein

in 1834.

Lastly, in the iron industry, coke was finally applied to all stages of iron smelting, replacing

charcoal. This had been achieved much earlier for lead and copper as well for producing pig

iron in a blast furnace, but the second stage in the production of bar iron depended on the use

of potting and stamping or paddling. Later inventions such as the power loom and Richard

Trevithick‟s high pressure steam engine were also important in the growing industrialisation

of Britain.

The application of steam engines to powering cotton mills and ironworks enabled these to be

built in places that were most convenient because other resources were available, rather than

where there was water to power a watermill. The supply of cheaper iron and steel aided the

development of boilers and steam engines, and eventually railways. Improvements in

machine tools allowed better working of iron and steel and further boosted the industrial

growth of Britain.

9
(C) DEVELOPMENTS IN TRANSPORT:

(ROADS, CANALS, STEAMSHIPS AND RAILWAYS)

In the pre-Industrial society of Britain, communications and transport depended on horses

and river transport. At the beginning of the Industrial revolution, inland transport was by

navigable rivers and roads, with coastal vessels employed to move heavy goods by sea.

Railways or wagon ways were used for conveying coal to rivers for further shipment, but

canals had not been constructed. Animals supplied all of the motive power on land, with sails

providing the motive power on the sea. The Industrial revolution improved Britain‟s transport

infrastructure with a turnpike road network, a canal and waterway network, and a railway

network.

Governments encouraged road building but this was largely met with indifference from local

populations. In the 18th century, Britain began building more turnpike roads ie privatized

roads that people had to pay to use. Rivers were used for transport wherever. At the

beginning of the Industrial revolution, inland transport was by navigable rivers and roads,

with coastal vessels employed to move heavy goods by sea. The Industrial revolution

improved Britain‟s transport infrastructure with a turnpike road network, a canal waterway

network and a railway network. Raw materials and finished products could be moved more

quickly and cheaply than before. Improved transportation also allowed new ideas to spread

quickly.

All the major rivers of the United Kingdom were navigable during the Industrial revolution.

Some were anciently navigable notably the Severn, Thames and Trent. The Severn in

particular was used for the movement of goods to the Midlands which had been imported into

Bristol from abroad and for the export of goods from centres of production in Shropshire

and the Black Country. Transport was by way of trows, small sailing vessels which could

10
pass the various the various shallows and bridges in the river. The trows could navigate the

Bristol Channel to the South Wales ports and Somerset ports such as Bridgewater and even as

far as France.

Sailing vessels had long been used for moving goods round the British coast. The trade

transporting coal to London from Newcastle had begun in medieval times. The trade

transporting coal to London from Newcastle had begun in medieval times. The transport of

goods coastwise by sea within Britain was common during the Industrial revolution, as for

centuries before. This became less important with the growth of the railways at the end of the

period.

Canals began to be built in the late 18th century to link the major manufacturing centres in

the Midlands and north with seaports and with London. Canals were the first technology to

allow bulk materials to be easily transported across country. Canal construction served as a

model for the organization and methods later used to construct the railways. Britain‟s canal

network, together with its surviving mill buildings, is one of the most enduring features of the

early Industrial revolution to be seen in Britain.

Canals served to boost the river and navigation system. The major factor of canals was that

they could carry large and heavy loads faster and more efficient than previous methods. They

created centres of industry and cities and towns grew.

Canals in Britain began to be constructed in the late 18th century to link major manufacturing

centres across the country. For instance, the Bridge water canal in North West England

(1761) There was the Leeds, Liverpool, Thames and Severn canal which were opened

between 1774 and 1789. Bulk materials were easily transported across the country such as

coal.

11
Much of the original British road system was poorly maintained by thousands of local

perishes. From 1720s, turnpike trusts were set up to change tolls and maintain some roads.

Increasing numbers of main roads were turnpike from the 1750s to the extent that almost

every main road in England and Wales was the responsibility of the turnpike trust. New

engineering roads were built by John Metcalf, Thomas Telford and John Macadam. The

major turnpikes radiated from London and were the means by which the Royal mail was able

to reach the rest of the country. Heavy goods transport on these roads was by means of slow,

broad wheeled carts hauled by teams of horses. Lighter goods were conveyed by smaller

cards or by teams of pack horses. Stage coaches carried the rich and less wealthy could pay to

ride on carriers carts.

Railways brought about the real revolution in European communications. Much of the initial

impetus and knowledge came from Great Britain were independent companies that have been

experimenting with various forms of steam locomotion in the 1820s. The British government

authorized individual companies by Act of Parliament. As a result, from about 1820, Lebeau

and Charles Rogier Company laid out a network of railways which connected Belgium with

Holland, Germany and France. The first passenger railway, about 16 km (10 miles) long

and again using horses for power, opened near Swansea in Wales in 1806.

British inventor and mining engineer, Richard Trevithick has been called the „ Father‟ of

the steam railways. In 1804, he used steam from his new high pressure steam engines to

power railway locomotives at the iron works at Penydarren in Merthyr Tydfil in Wales.

The civil and mechanical engineer George Stephenson built some short railways with

increasingly powerful locomotives before being appointed surveyor of the Stockton to

Darlington railways in North East England in 1825. This line, often described as the first

modern railway was a test of his abilities to master geographical problems in the design of his

engines. His engine was the best for pulling heavy loads over long distances.

12
In 1830, George Stephenson built a railway between the major towns of Liverpool and

Manchester. This was the first railway with a twin track, which meant that trains could run

more frequently. The expansion of the railways in Britain was not a steady progress. The mid

1840s were a boom period for railway investment which was yielding for greater profits than

other traditional areas investment. However, a financial crash towards the end of the decade

caused the value of the shares to collapse and several investors were ruined. Another cycle of

boom and bust occurred in the 1860s. Nevertheless, by the end of the 19th century the railway

system in Britain covered most of the country and underpinned on industrial economy.

The railways allowed the easier movement of both raw materials and finished goods. Branded

goods could be sold anywhere in Europe giving rise to and stimulating greater

industrialization during the course of the 19th century. Many new jobs were created by the

drivers, porters and other professions. In addition, the building of the railways stimulated

other industries such as iron processing and engineering.

Furthermore, railways also brought the “ penny post ” and helped the spread of daily

newspapers as opinion makers, workers could now visit the seaside and resort centres

developed. They could also live in suburbs outside the cities. Police and soldiers were also

moved quickly around the country to put down demonstrations such as the Chartist

demonstrations in Britain.

13
(d) GROWTH OF MARKETS:

(DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL: FREE TRADE)

Another critical factor was that British financial institutions were in place, such as a central

bank, to finance new factories. British entrepreneurs such as Peter Taylor, Thomas Lombe

and Richard Cobden who were interested in taking risks to make profits led the charge of

industrialisation. The enormous demands made on capital to finance these developments in

industrialization helped to create the enhanced position of banking on an international scale.

The tendency in each country was for the government to rely upon one bank as an agent for

its own financial transactions and as a means of controlling the fiscal economy of the country.

This was the origin of the central banks in all the countries to regulate and standardise the

currencies in Britain.

The most striking feature of all was the growth of international financial operations. The

notes of the bank of England enjoyed an unrivalled position in Europe after the Napoleonic

war and the immense amount of capital available in England. It is important to note that due

to her earlier industrialisation, combined with a long experience in the handling of cheques

and the clearing house system made London the financial centre of the world.

Significantly, merchant bankers in the city, the great houses of Rothschild and Baring

brothers, were the services to which governments and businessmen all over the continent as

well as in North and South America increasingly turned for the floating of loans to finance

new industrial developments and the building of railways.

The activities of these London bankers spanned across the different countries in a delicate

web of international credit eventually making the economy of one country become largely

involved in the economies of other states. It is interesting to note that international finance

and increased financial dependence on Britain consequently raised questions on new policies

such as free trade or protective customs duties.

14
National commercial policies were directly influenced by the strengthened position of the

commercial and industrial classes after the Revolutions of 1830 in France and Belgium and

the Reform Act of 1832 in Great Britain. National policies came to be based on the

assumption that in open competition, the British industrialists had an overriding advantage

over their counterparts on the continent. Thus, whereas in Great Britain, the tendency was to

continue to lower or to remove import duties, a policy of protection for the new industries

prevailed on the continent.

Patterns of trade were changed by the Industrial revolution. In pre-industrial times, most

people relied on local trade within the provinces where they lived. Farmers earned a living by

selling their produce at local markets. Most farmers lived in more isolated areas where local

markets were small affairs and there was much less demand for goods. Some would travel

long distances to reach the larger markets. There were frequent food shortages and the poor

were often hungry.

Railways opened up new markets for farmers. Cereals, meat and vegetable could be carried in

large volumes to distant towns. Food shortages became less frequent and prices fell as more

produce was available. The lower classes could afford better and more varied food. The upper

classes still spent on luxuries, but ships plying their overseas trade were filled with

commodities that everyone could afford. Britain had an early advantage over foreign

competitors because there were no internal changes on trade (tarrifs) from the middle of the

18th century, when turnpike roads that charged for their use began to decline.

15
(e) GROWTH OF TOWNS:

(IMPACT ON LIVING CONDITIONS, HOUSING AND HEALTH)

The factory system was largely responsible for the rise of the modern city as workers

migrated into the cities in search of employment in the factories. The industries in

Manchester were nicknamed “ Cottonopolis ” and the city became arguably the world‟s first

Industrial city. Industrialisation almost inevitably implied the growth of towns. It has been

calculated that the date when more people began to live in towns than in the country in

Britain was during the 1850s.

Living conditions varied during the Industrial revolution from the splendour of the homes of

the owners to the squalor of the lives of the workers. Poor people lived in very small houses

in cramped streets. These homes would share toilet facilities, have open sewers and would be

at risk of damp. Disease was spread through a contaminated water supply.

Conditions did improve during the 9th century as public health acts were introduced covering

things such as sewage, hygiene and making some boundaries upon the construction of homes.

However, not everybody lived in homes like these.

Urbanisation had a twofold effect as it was both positive and negative. Positively, by 1850,

more people were living in urban areas in Britain than rural areas. According to Stearns,

“By 1840, there were about 2 million people in the city of London. Manchester rapidly grew

as a result of textile industry around 1856 there were about 180 000 people.” Urbanisation

stimulated the booming of new industries by concentrating workers and factories together.

The industrial revolution also created a larger middle class of professionals such as lawyers

and doctors. The conditions for the poor improved over the course of the 19th century because

the government and local plans which led to cities becoming cleaner places.

Urbanisation also had a negative impact. There was pollution on the class neighbourhoods as

overcrowding was a common feature.

16
In the 1st half of the 19th century, urban overcrowding, poor diets, poor sanitation and

essentially medieval medical remedies all contributed to very poor public health for majority

of English people. Public health and life expectancy in Britain was equally appalling. In

Manchester, the neighbourhoods were filthy, unplanned and slipshod. Roads were muddy and

lacked sidewalks. Homes lacked toilets and sewage systems. There were outbreak of diseases

such as cholera, tuberculosis and typhoid. According to Haley, “ The Registrar General

reported that average life expectancy in urban areas was 37 years in London and an alarming

26 years in Liverpool.”

2. IMPACT/ EFFECTS OF BRITISH INDUSTRIALISATION

a) WORKING CONDITIONS, CHILD LABOUR, HOURS, PAY AND SAFETY

Working conditions were deplorable. Those workers who had come from agricultural

backgrounds were faced with a big adjustment. The factory system required constant labour.

Factory owners were constantly faced with the task of breaking the habits of these workers

and getting them accustomed to time based labour. The discipline of the workers directly

impacted their productivity and, ultimately, the profit of the factory. Factory owners

instituted regular hours of for workers to ensure that their machines were always producing.

The employers used strict rules and punishment for those who disobeyed. For instance,

workers could be fined for being late or fined for being intoxicated at work.

17
The early factories were extremely unsafe. Imagine going to work without safety regulations

and with no protections in place. Conditions in the coal mines were equally hazardous as

well. Usually, men hunched in cramped tunnels that were only about three or four feet high,

dug coal and placed it in carts. Then small children or women would push the carts to the

surface. Coal miners were faced with damp, cramped conditions, along with the danger of

cave ins and toxic gas. Many children who worked in the mines had long lasting health

effects, such as lung disease and stunted growth.

Against this background, a series of acts of parliament known as the Factory Acts were

introduced from 1832. These limited the number of hours women and children could work in

factories, and factory inspectors were employed to ensure that the new laws were being

followed. The Factory Acts were intended to improve the lives of women and children but

people objected to them. Poor families often needed to work long hours just to earn the

money to survive, and the acts prevented this. Others resented the government interfering in

how people raised their children.

Many children were forced to work in relatively bad conditions for much lower pay than the

elders 10-20% of an adult wage. Children as young as four were employed. Beatings and

long hours were common with some child coal miners working from 4 am until 5 pm.

Conditions were dangerous with some children killed when they dozed off and fell into the

carts, while others died from gas explosions. Many children developed lung cancer and died

before the age of twenty five. Workhouses would sell orphans and abandoned children as

“pamper apprentices” working without wages for board and lodging. Those who ran away

would be whipped and returned to their masters.

18
Reports were written detailing some of the abuses, particularly in the coal mines and textile

factories. Some children were employed as “scavengers by common mills and would climb

under machinery to pick up cotton, working 14 hours a day, six days a week. Some lost their

hands or limbs while others were crushed under the machines and some were decapitated.

Young girls worked at match factories where phosphorous fumes would cause many to

develop posy jaw. Children employed at glass works were regularly burned and blinded and

those working at potteries were vulnerable to poisonous clay dust.

Public outcry, especially among the upper and middle classes helped stir changes in the

young workers plight. Politicians and the government tried to limit child labour by law but

factory owners resisted. In 1833 and 1844, the first general laws against child labour, the

Factory Acts were passed in England. Children younger than nine were not allowed to work.

Children were not permitted to work at night and the work day of the youth under the age of

19 years was limited to 12 hours. Factory inspectors supervised the execution of the law.

However, their security made enforcement difficult. About ten years later, the employment of

children and women in mining was forbidden. Thus, the most positive thing in these laws is

that they decreased the number of child labourers.

THE GREAT DEBATE: IMPACT ON DIFFERENT SOCIAL CLASSES

In terms of social structure, the Industrial revolution witnessed the triumph of a middle class

of industrialists and businessmen over a landed class of nobility and gentry. Most historians

agree that while the upper classes did not make many practical gains from the Industrial

Revolution, they also lost very little. Land retained its value and some noblemen grew

wealthier because they owned estates situated at the centre of industrial developments. In

addition, the upper classes largely maintained their political influence.

19
There is also agreement that the middle classes made some gains overall. Many of them

became wealthier as a result of the Industrial revolution, either directly as factory owners or

industrial inventors or indirectly as bankers, investors and merchants. Their economic rise

was accompanied by growing political power. In Britain, the middle classes won the vote and

some became members of parliament. Life in the urban areas was better than in the rural

areas. Work was also more reliable in urban areas. This led to the creation of the new middle

class.

The social impact on the ordinary lower working classes were negative on the other hand.

Working conditions were poor. The great cholera epidemics of 1832 and 1848 spread like a

wildfire. Living conditions were equally appalling. (slum housing) There was rampant child

labour, as young as seven years were employed. There was no social welfare. The pay was

meagre. Workers worked long hours. In addition, workers were not represented as there were

no unions. Families were split because only men lived in towns, leaving behind their families

in rural areas. Workers and the lower classes were also not given an opportunity to learn.

However, there is more disagreement amongst historians about the overall effects of the

Industrial revolution on the lower classes. Those who lived on the land probably lost out, as

their livelihoods were threatened by wealthier landlords who could take advantage of

changing conditions. Many migrated to towns where men, women and children worked in

factories. Some did so voluntarily, but others forced to move because factory work was the

only way to make a living. The conditions in which most of them lived and worked were

squalid.

However, historians also argue that their conditions may not have been any worse than they

had been before industrialisation took hold. Improvements slowly began to be made in health

and the size of the population grew. Men who lived in large groups in towns were better able

to organise themselves into groups that could campaign for change.

20
Gradually, governments introduced measures to limit working hours for women and children.

More children were given a basic education by 1850. By the middle of the century, there

were also some opportunities for leisure activities in large towns and cities. Publishers

produced cheap magazines and novels aimed at the mass market. Theatres attracted new

audiences with popular entertainments, including music halls and melodramas.

b) WORKERS‟ REACTION TO MECHANISATION AND ECONOMIC CHANGE

(LUDDITES AND CAPTAIN SWING RIOTS)

English workers known as Luddites was formed to protest against industrialisation and

sometimes sabotaged the factories. The outbreak of the Luddite disturbances in the Midlands

in 1811-2 is an episode in the long and varied history of the relations between masters and

men in the frame-work knitting trade, and as such can only rightly be understood in

connection with what comes before and after. The main feature of the disturbances in

Nottinghamshire and the adjoining counties was the organized destruction of stocking

frames by small bands of workmen.

To some, the words Luddite and machine-breaker are synonymous. This interpretation has

survived into modern times where „neo-Luddite‟ is usually characterized as representing

active resistance to the progress of new technology. However, as with the Luddite riots,

conventional characterizations do not accurately capture the actual state of affairs.

While it is true that the Luddites engaged in machine-breaking, there was much more

involved in the Luddite riots of 1811-12.

These events in the English Midlands still capture the attention of economic historians,

sociologists and philosophers almost two centuries later. Modern observers often highlight

the rebellion against technology or technological unemployment that the Luddite riots

represent.

21
Some modern historians emphasize the place of the Luddites in the working class struggle

against the onslaught of industrialization, e.g., Observers closer to that time, such as Lord

Byron, identified with the revolutionary elements in the Luddite movement, as reflected in

his “Song for the Luddites”. There are many possible themes. But, as with many historical

events, the Luddite riots can only be understood "in connection with what comes before

and after".

As any reader of Charles Dickens knows, the early 19th century in England was a bleak time

for the poor and destitute. Social injustice is hardly descriptive of the general situation. As for

the working poor, conditions in the textile mills and putting-out shops were hostile to the

many children who were compelled, of economic necessity, to work there. There were few

mechanisms for adult workers to express discontent. One method was general riot, but this

was used only in extreme situations, such as when food was intolerably scarce and prices for

food were high.

In response to conditions in a specific industry, machine-breaking was a more common and

effective tool for workers to express discontent. Instances of organized machine breaking

were not original to the Luddite riots. Such actions had occurred at least since the early 18th

century. Yet, as evidenced by the army of 12,000 soldiers that was used to suppress the

uprising at the height of the Luddite riots, there was something different involved. One

interesting aspect of the riots was the absence of any Parliamentary action on the riots until

after the peak of the rioting had passed.

The Luddite riots were situated in a particular historical context, just as the technology boom

of the last two decades of the 20th century is situated in a particular historical context. Certain

elements carried forward from previous times are echoed while new elements are also

introduced.

22
The specifics of the situation cause individuals to react in a collective fashion that creates

“something new”. Yet, even with a long period for reflection, there is still misunderstanding

about the Luddite riots. For example, in contrast to the riots in the woollen district of

Yorkshire in 1796, the Luddite riots did not involve mobs attacking factories where new and

improved machinery was in use. Rather, the Luddite movement was aimed at specific

manufacturers known for harsh treatment of workers that had, in most instances, rapidly

achieved a high level of wealth. The economic situation created by the war with France, and

the associated disruption of trade, had raised the cost of food at a time of reduced working

opportunities.

In turn, the degree of organized reaction against those seen to be benefitting at a time of

hardship for the lower working classes was, in a sense, revolutionary.

The „Swing‟ riots broke out at the end of August 1830, in Kent. They spread first to the

South-East of England, and then across the country. By the winter of 1832, more than 3,000

riots had broken out in 45 different counties. Almost all of these episodes took place in rural

areas: in all cases, rioters were rural workers, sometimes led by local craftsmen. The first

protests saw rioters breaking agricultural capital, especially threshing machines: between

September and November 1830. Historian Holland lists 529 threshing machines attacked.

Historian Hobsbawn place the start of the riots on the 28th of August 1830, when a gang of

people smashed a threshing machine in Lower Hardres, Kent. Recently, historian Griffin

demonstrated that riots began 4 days earlier, when 20 men destroyed the first threshing

machine in Elham, Kent.

23
Unrest took several forms. Arson attacks were common and in many parishes rioters forced

the overseers of the poor out of the parish. Wage negotiations occurred frequently, with

farmers agreeing to a minimum wage under the condition that tithes and rents were reduced

commensurately. Threatening letters – signed by the mythical „Captain Swing‟ – were sent to

farmers. These letters caught the public imagination, and by October 1830.

The Times began to call „Swing‟ the whole wave of riots. Unrest simmered for more than two

years, until the winter of 1832. After an initially timid response, the government adopted the

hard line and ordered the army and local militias to quell the protest. It also set up a special

commission; this commission initially passed 252 death sentences, but eventually commuted

most of them into overseas transportation.

Several factors contributed to the wave of riots in 1830-32. Historian Hobsbawn emphasize

how bad weather, a poor harvest and the prospect of a cold winter made the already difficult

situation of rural workers unsustainable. The year 1830 also saw an increase in political

agitation as well as discussions of electoral reform. Against the background of the July

revolution in France, agitators like William Cobbett toured the countryside, arguing for the

need of change, a living wage, and a rebalancing of power. News of the French and Belgian

revolutions may have provided the spark that ignited the revolt in Kent.

24
In addition, discussions of electoral reform had come to naught under the Duke of

Wellington‟s Tory government. They would eventually lead to the Great Reform Act of 1832

under his liberal successor – but only after Wellington‟s government fell during the worst

period of the riots. Once the revolt had started, riots spread to the rest of the country, often as

a result of bands of workers travelling from parish to parish to exact justice on the landlords

or following the accounts of incidents in nearby parishes reported by “linkmen” travelling

along the major roads.

Whatever the immediate motives of the riots, historians agree that the underlying cause of

unrest was a progressive deterioration of the economic and social situation of rural workers.

Three factors contributed to the decline. First, since the end of 1600 the enclosure movement

had progressively deprived rural workers of access to common lands, effectively

transforming them into a “landless proletarian, relying almost exclusively on wage-labour”.

Second, bringing in the harvest in cereal-producing areas required a large workforce – but

employment opportunities were scarce during the rest of the year. The Poor Laws allowed to

maintain a sufficient number of agricultural labourers year-round, but they had come under

considerable strain since the beginning of 1800 because of population growth and the decline

of cottage industry. As an increasing number of the poor claimed relief, allowances were

reduced and workers became increasingly dissatisfied with the system.

Finally, the progressive mechanization of agriculture made redundant much of the

agricultural labour force and undermined its standard of living. The adoption of threshing

machines was especially harmful for rural workers because it deprived them of the major

source of income during the winter season. While enclosures, poor laws and mechanization

appear in almost any account of the Swing riots, historians disagree on their relative

importance.

25
Historian Thompson emphasize the role of enclosures and the loss of access to land. The

Parliamentary enquiry, set up after the 1830-32 riots, largely blamed the “Old Poor Law” –

soon to be reformed thoroughly. Finally, historian Hobsbawn insist on the importance of the

new machines.

The “Captain Swing” riots in 1830 England constitutes the largest episode of political

unrest in English history, with more than 3,000 cases of arson, looting, attacks on authorities,

and machine-breaking across 45 counties. It ended with military intervention and severe

repression, but the riots had also lasting consequences, as they ushered in a period of

important political and institutional reform.

c) WORKERS‟ DEMANDS FOR POLITICAL REFORM (CHARTISTS)

Socialism emerged as a critique of capitalism. Marxism began essentially as a reaction to the

Industrial revolution. According to Karl Marx, “ Industrialisation polarised society into

bourgeoisie and the proletariat.” Marx saw the process of industrialisation as the logical

dialectical progression of feudal economic modes, necessary for the full development of

capitalism which he saw as in itself a necessary step to the development of socialism and

eventually communism.

Marx‟s ideas were revolutionary in nature because they called for more than just a change in

the working conditions at the factories and mines but for a total proletariat take over. Marx

wrote that, “ The proletariats have nothing to lose but their chains, they have the world to

win. Workers of all lands unite!” In this regard, Marx argued that the destined proletariat

revolution will be a world revolution, inevitably triumphant, inaugurating first a proletariat

state and eventually a truly classless society. Such a supra national appeal was relevant to any

worker, whether in the USA, Britain, France or Germany.

26
Marx and Engels argued that the “ Age of revolutions” had reached its climax and that the

proletariats needed to rise and take over the means of production. They wrote that,

“ What the bourgeoisie produces are its own gravediggers. Its fall and victory of the

proletariat are equally inevitable.”

Marx and Engels also argued that democracy was a sham, for parliamentary government was

only a mask for the class rule of the capitalists. Such ideas certainly inspired revolutionary

dissent during the last quarter of the 19th century and 20th century. As a result, the Industrial

revolution represented a shift in influence away from the traditional power holders in

England and conferring the new wealth and power upon the growing middle class of

enterprising traders, manufactures and financiers. The middle classes became the prime

movers of change as „ Captains of industry‟ were self- made mill owners of Lancashire and

the hardworking manufacturers of northern England. The result was the growing tide of

liberal opinion hostile to the existing order.

The Reform Act of 1832 was the first proof that industrialisation could have important

political effects. The changes that came about by the 1832 Reform Act seen modest by 21st

century standards, but they were considerable in the context of the time. One of the most

significant parts of the abolition of „rotten boroughs‟ seats in parliament for constituencies

that had few or no voters. Parliamentary seats were extended so that 22 new boroughs, mostly

industrial towns, were represented in parliament, but there was no attempt to make sure that

every MP represented the same number of voters. Several pocket boroughs, small

constituencies controlled by the wealthy, survived. Voting was not secret ballot as it is today,

and landowners still influenced elections. However, the franchise was granted to property

owners, which included most of the middle class.

27
The lower classes gained almost nothing from the 1832 Reform Act and the Factory Acts

were not improving industrial conditions quickly enough to keep the working class happy. As

dissatisfaction spread, groups began to form to campaign for more political rights for the

poor, these were eventually united as a movement known as Chartism.

In 1836, William Lovett formed the London Working Men‟s Association, a club designed to

help educate skilled workers to broaden their opportunities. In 1838, Lovett and a fellow

political reformer, Francis Place, drafted a parliamentary bill that became the basis of the

People‟s Charter. The Charter demanded:

 universal franchise for men.

 that MPs should not have to be property owners.

 that parliamentary constituencies should be of equal size.

 payment for MPs.

 voting by secret ballot.

The aims of the Chartists were beyond electoral reform. They believed that political change

was imperative if living conditions were to improve and that the People‟s Charter would

ensure „free trade, universal peace, freedom of religion, and national education.‟ This became

a rallying cry for the working classes in many towns. Chartism spread rapidly, inspired by

leaders such as Feargus O‟Connor, who issued the Chartist message.

As a result of the Chartist movement, a „People‟s Parliament‟ met in London in 1839. This

was an unelected body and had no legal power, but it drew up a series of demands for reform

that backed the six points raised in the People‟s Charter. The government was afraid that the

Chartists might inspire a nationwide revolution.

However, the movement declined quickly. The main reason for this was disagreements

among Chartist leaders. After the authorities suppressed a Chartist uprising in Wales, many

of its leaders were arrested and imprisoned.

28
By 1848, the movement was losing influence and a mass rally in London that year proved to

be last serious action by the Chartists. Chartism might have failed as a movement, but most of

its ideas survived and were to become law. For instance, voting in secret also became the law.

Politicians now knew they had to focus on all classes, not just landowners and the factory

owners. In addition to these, the working classes gained political power in other ways, in

particular through trade unions.

d) ORGANISED LABOUR, TRADE UNIONS AND COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES

Trade Unions helped to advance the interests of the working people. The power of a union

could demand better terms by withdrawing all labour and causing a consequent cessation of

production. The main method the unions used to effect change was strike action. Many

strikes were painful events for both sides, the unions and management. In England, the

Combination Act forbade workers to form any kind of trade union from 1799 until its repeal

in 1824. In 1832, the Reform Act which extended the vote in England did not grant universal

suffrage. Six men from Tolpuddle in Dorset founded the Friendly Society of Agricultural

labourers to protest against the gradual lowering of wages in the 1830s. They refused to

work for less than 10 shillings a week. By this time, wages had been reduced to seven

shillings a week. Enlightened industrialists such as Robert Owen also supported these

organisations to improve the conditions of the working class, notably at the New Lanark

mills. Further, Josiah Wedgewood and Matthew Boulton were other prominent early

industrialists, who employed the factory system.

However, establishing trade Unions in industry proved difficult even after the laws against

combinations or unions were repealed in 1824. In 1831, miners went on strike over reduced

wages but they lost support after some strikers resorted to violence. Nevertheless, efforts to

organise trade unions in Britain were more successful in the second half of the century.

29
Trade Unions slowly overcame the legal restrictions on the rights to strike. In 1842 a general

strike involving cotton workers and colliers was organised through the Chartist movement

and it stopped production across Britain. Eventually, more effective political organisation for

working people was achieved after the extensions of the franchise in 1867 and 1885. This

gave birth to the British labour party.

e) GOVERNMENT REACTION TO THE CONSEQUENCES

OF INDUSTRIALISATION:

(EARLY MOVES TOWARDS REGULATION AND CONTROL OF WORKING

AND LIVING CONDITIONS)

The response of government to the gradual emergence of industrial capitalism may be traced

well back into the eighteenth century. So far as this response affected the size of

government, its first manifestations were local. The growing urban centres lacked the most

elementary facilities to meet their needs for water, drainage, streets, police and fire

protection, and certain health measures. These urgent requirements of individual localities

were met at first by private bill legislation in Parliament, which usually set up Improvement

Commissioners empowered to perform specified duties in newly established Improvement

Districts. A very large number of such agencies were established in the latter half of the

eighteenth century and the first part of the nineteenth.

The use of ad hoc arrangements reflected the pressing needs created by the new conditions,

the incapacity of the corrupt and oligarchic municipal corporations, and the equal incapacity

of the parish vestries and county justices who constituted such local authority as then existed

in rural areas and in newly grown but still unincorporated urban areas. Parliamentary private

bills and a multitude of ad hoc local authorities were, however, no substitute for a logical

structure of local government sufficiently vigorous and powerful to meet local needs and to

act as an efficient local agent of the central government.

30
The government did intervene to some degree in the economy. It imposed significant

import tariffs, though these were largely motivated by revenue considerations. It supported

British agricultural interests through the Corn Laws which limited grain imports. It also

imposed the Navigation Acts which required goods to be transported on British ships, and

required colonial trade to flow through Britain. This was justified partly on the military need

to maintain a large cadre of skilled sailors. There were also on the books a whole series of

measures requiring local magistrates to impose limitations on wages, and requiring artisans to

serve apprenticeships. But the enforcement of these by local magistrates seems to have been

singularly unenthusiastic, even in the seventeenth century. The same wages were passed year

after year as the statutory maxima, but no-one was prosecuted and the wages bore no relation

to actual market wages.

The government did also maintain a patent system which gave exclusive rights over

innovations to their inventors for a limited number of years. This was established in 1624

under the Statute of Monopolies, which had swept away many monopolistic privileges. The

importance of the patent system in stimulating the wave of innovation that swept through

Britain in the late eighteenth century is unclear. It gave security to some innovators. But it

was sometimes ineffective. And in other cases innovators used it to slow down the pace of

innovation. James Watt, for example, used his control of key patents to the steam engine to

block the development of new types of steam engines by other engineers, even under license

The amount of military expenditure over a period of 120 years is extraordinary by modern

standards. Many manufacturers opposed the patent law and encouraged piracy – through

they often had local reasons for doing so. The Society for the Encouragement of the Arts,

Manufactures and Commerce, founded in 1753, offered lump sum prizes to innovators who

were willing to allow free use of their inventions.

31
Britain on the eve of the Industrial Revolution was thus not the Smithian ideal of limited

government and unfettered free markets. But it was an economy where the government

played a minuscule role in directing economic activity. The reasons for the non-

interventionist policy were partly ideological and partly practical. The practical reason was

that from 1688 on, Britain was engaged in a long struggle with France for military

supremacy, sometimes called the Second Hundred Years War.

From 1688 to 1815, when Napoleon was finally defeated at Waterloo, Britain declared war

eight times, and was engaged in fighting for one out of every two years. The wars placed

enormous strains on the ability of the government to raise revenues, and severely limited its

spending in other areas. For the government relied for revenue largely on excise taxes and

custom duties. These taxes probably fell disproportionately on the poor, as do consumption

taxes generally since the poor consume a larger share of their incomes. Attempts to increase

these taxes resulted in the problems of rioting, and of widespread evasion. The ideological

reasons for non-intervention were a long tradition in English Common Law which opposed

monopolies and exclusive franchises, and strongly respected private property, as well as a

general sentiment in favour of independent business activity.

Under the pressure of the Napoleonic Wars an income tax was levied in 1799, but was

repealed when peace came in 1816, and not re-imposed until the 1840s. The other major tax

in the 18th century was the Land Tax, which was imposed in 1692 on rental incomes. But

since this became fixed in nominal terms the inflation of the late eighteenth century combined

with the growing size of the economy steadily reduced its importance. Once the excise or

customs tax got too high the incentive to smuggle or evade would rise correspondingly.

32
Some economists such as Douglass North and Mancur Olson have argued that it was the

creation of a laissez-faire state which mainly served to provide public order and secure

property rights which liberated the economic energies of people in Britain. That is why there

were changes occurring in many sectors of the economy at once. Since the changes in

industry, agricultural and transport also required huge capital investments in many cases

other historians have focused on changes in the capital market in the period leading up to the

Industrial Revolution. The traditional account of the Industrial Revolution sees it as a period

of great capital accumulation. After all there were built in this period 6,000 miles of railroad,

and 2,000 miles of canals, as well as more than 18,000 miles of turnpike road. In addition we

had great urban growth with all the associated housing stock and infrastructure. Also there

was the expansion of the textile industries, iron and steel, and the coal mines.

Some writers of the traditional account, such as Ashton in the Industrial Revolution, seem to

give almost a causal role to an increase in capital accumulation as causing the Industrial

Revolution. Ashton notes that the importance of the lowering of the rate of interest in the half

century before the industrial revolution has never been properly stressed by historians.

Ashton's argument is that as real incomes rose in the early eighteenth century, so did

savings. Also the new political regime created by the settlement of 1688, which established

William and Mary on the English throne, reduced the uncertainties associated with

investment. This increased propensity to invest was reflected in lower rates of return earned

on different types of capital asset in the economy. Thus the traditional account of the

Industrial Revolution often stresses the importance of large scale investments in creating the

changes of this period.

33
By 1850, most places in Britain were within reach of a railway and this was to have a great

impact on communications within the country. News and newspapers could spread rapidly. A

national postal service also began in 1840, using railways to distribute an increasing volume

of letters and parcels across the country. Diet improved, as fresh food could be quickly and

easily transported to market. Labour could move more easily to where there was work, and

this generated greater wealth. Travel grew more affordable, and people began making trips to

holiday resorts that catered for ordinary families, as to sporting events. Working class in

Britain made up 80% of the population. Workers had no bargaining power for higher wages

and better working conditions. In 1823, about 1,5 million people were unemployed. There

were no laws to regulate industry during this period, 1790-1850.

Workers unfortunately could not use the democratic political system in Britain to fight for

rights and reforms. Only the wealthy had the right to vote. Workers in Britain were victims of

the Combination Acts which made it illegal for workers to form unions. Skilled workers

such as weavers were outplayed by the use of machines and they were reduced to starvation.

The Reforming Acts of the 1830's began to meet these needs. The Parliamentary Reform

Act of 1832 broadened the franchise and went some distance to adjust the distribution of

seats to that of the population. It helped make Parliament a more responsive organ of public

opinion, and it also raised the level of local government. For, with the weeding out of rotten

boroughs and the extension of the franchise, the opportunity to control Parliamentary seats by

corrupting limited local electorates and corporations was reduced and gradually eliminated.

34
The Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834 combined the minuscule parishes into Poor Law

Unions and set Guardians, partly elected, partly appointed over them. Its emphasis on indoor

relief, more rationally organized, was the basis for an uneven, inadequate, but still gradual

proliferation of institutions for pauper care, not merely shelters and workhouses, but

infirmaries, old age homes, orphanages, and even something like schools. By subjecting the

local Guardians to the Central Board of Poor Law Commissioners and its inspectorate, the

Act introduced that important device of British government, the local administration of

centrally established standards, supervised and inspected by an organ of the national

government. For the next fifty years, until the Local Government Acts of 1888 and 1894 set

up County Councils and Urban and Rural District Councils, the Poor Law Unions shared

with the sanitary authorities an increasing burden of all types of local administration outside

the boundaries of the incorporated boroughs.

Finally, the Municipal Corporations Act of 1835 began a fundamental reform of city

government. The municipal franchise was extended to the entire body of rate payers, and the

municipal council was established as the legal agent of the local community

and efficient 'instruments of local government" at large rather than as the personification of a

restricted group of corporations. Although the power of the new councils was at

first severely limited and even the powers of the old ad hoc local authorities were not

transferred to them by general act, such transfer was made permissive and gradually And

the new municipal governments proved themselves, their sphere of authority was widened by

private bill and general legislation. Henceforth they were also treated as the local agents

for instituting and administering such measures as were necessary to meet general standards

set by Parliament.

35
The Trevelyan-Northcote investigations (1848-1853) and their impressive report laid the

foundation for the modem British civil service. The National Civil Service Commission

was established in 1855 as an examining board, but partisan nomination continued for a time.

There followed a series of reforms in individual departments until in 1870 the public

competitive examination was made the normal entrance to a civil service career. This was

followed by improvements in standards of work and promotion. Similar practices were

gradually established in local government. These improvements in the structure and

personnel of government were in part adaptations to the needs of the developing industrial

economy and to the new functions which government was assuming to meet those needs, in

part prerequisites for the later assumption of still larger functions. Of the great array of

governmental functions that were assumed and extended in the course of the nineteenth

century, two reforms, those of the police and of the Post Office, were outstanding for their

effects on the numbers of government employees. The Metropolitan Police Force was

established in 1829 and subjected to the control of the Home Secretary. By an Act of 1835,

responsibility for police management in the boroughs outside London was uniformly placed

upon statutory watch committees of the Town Councils.

Finally, in 1856, every county was compelled to employ a paid police force, grants-in-aid

being made contingent upon the attainment of a standard of efficiency defined by the Home

Office and certified by its police inspectors. The expansion of the Post Office got its great

stimulus in 1840 when Rowland Hill, having calculated that the main cost of the

postal service was incurred in taxing letters at their starting point and collecting postage on

delivery, persuaded the government to disregard distance and introduce a uniform penny post

for the United Kingdom.

36
The Post Office was made to serve the Liberal desire to promote education and the

interchange of ideas when the book post was started in 1848 and when cheap rates were

extended to newspapers in 1870. And it was to serve the Liberal interest in thrift that

Gladstone started the Post Office savings banks in 1861. The success of uniform penny post

helped persuade the government in 1868 to absorb the telegraph system into the Post Office.

Private companies had developed the telegraph in Britain, but many localities found

themselves without service and, for a time, fees and services varied from district to district. In

spite of the prevailing sentiment against state enterprise, the Associated Chambers of

Commerce petitioned for government ownership and Parliament was induced to buy out the

existing firms. Other governmental initiatives were less demanding of manpower but highly

significant in opening up a broad range of activities and in causing a slow accretion to the

size of the state.

CONCLUSION

The Industrial Revolution became one of the major forces of change in the nineteenth century

as it led Western civilization into the industrial era that has characterized the modern world.

Beginning in Britain, its spread to the Continent and the new American nation ensured its

growth and domination of the Western world.

The Industrial Revolution seemed to prove to Europeans the underlying assumption of the

Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century, that human beings were capable of

dominating nature. By rationally manipulating the material environment for human

benefit, people could create new levels of material prosperity and produce machines not

dreamed of in their wildest imaginings.

37
Lost in the excitement of the Industrial Revolution were the voices that pointed to the

dehumanization of the workforce and the alienation from one‟s work, one‟s associates, one‟s

self, and the natural world. The Industrial Revolution also transformed the social world of

Europe. The creation of an industrial proletariat produced a whole new force for change.

The development of a wealthy industrial middle class presented a challenge to the long-term

hegemony of landed wealth. Though that wealth had been threatened by the fortunes of

commerce, it had never been overturned as the new bourgeoisie was more demanding.

38