or stockings, according as they want these respective articles ;
which articles, through their being thus cut and shaped with
scissors, are deprived of proper loop selvages, and of the
means of being stitched with a lacy seam, and instead thereof
are stitched together in the same manner as a tailor stitches
1 Felkin, op. cit., p. 145.
3 The fashion of wearing boots and gaiters was also a factor (see Committee
on'Frame-Work Knitters' Petition, 1819, p. 18).
1 Felkin,'^. cit. t p. 435. 4 H.O., 42. 118.
8 H.O., 42. 131. H.O., 42. 118.
FRAME-WORK KNITTERS 227
a garment.' In consequence of * the loopy nature of the
stocking-frame manufacture,' these cut selvedges give way,
goods become useless, and well-made stockings come into
disrepute. The immediate results of this new system of
manufacture are that the market is stocked with these worth-
less goods and that those who continue to make hose * in a
tradesmanlike manner,' must either make them cheaper
or starve. 1 ' If cut-up stockings are to be tolerated,' adds
the writer with indignation, * we may as well proclaim a new
era in the trade, and let tailors and milliners take measure
of our legs.' a
These cheap cut-up goods, which were spoiling the market
for the better class of hosiery, were as much disliked by
those hosiers who refused to make them, as by the men,
and attempts were made to stop their production. In 1809
various hosiers of standing agreed together to reduce wages
3s. a dozen, unless the workmen could obtain a reduc-
tion of frame rents and a cessation of * cut-up ' work. 8 But
the workmen were too ill-organised and too hard pressed
by starvation to achieve this. Instead, they turned first,
as in 1778, to Parliament in hopes of obtaining an Act to
regulate wages, but were advised to apply to the old London
Company instead. This company, supposed to be defunct
long before, was resuscitated for the occasion, and many
workmen became freemen of it on payment of l, 13s. 4d.
each. An action was brought before Lord Mansfield against
Mr. Payne of Burbage, Leicester, for ' colting,' that is having
too many apprentices contrary to the bye-laws of the company.
The jury found for the plaintiff, but awarded Is. damage
only, and though Mr. Payne was ruined by the heavy ex-
penses he had incurred, the result brought little advantage
1 A still inferior cut-up article was produced later, for when the raw material
grew more costly, instead of shaping the articles with the scissors it was
stretched to the shape required, but, of course, lost its shape the first time it
was washed. See 1819 Committee on Frame-Work Knitters' Petition, p. 8.
2 In connection with the perennial agitation of the workmen against ' cut-ups '
it is interesting to notice the Report on the Frame- Work Knitters in 1845 as
summarised by Dr. Cunningham : ' . . . there was a class of hosiery known as
cut work, and purchasers were not able to distinguish it readily from sound
work. Under these circumstances, the demand for sound work had greatly
fallen off, and some steps were necessary in order to give the public confidence
in the goods offered for sale ' (Cunningham, English Industry and Commerce,
ii. p. 617).
1 Felkin, op, tit., p. 130.
228 THE SKILLED LABOURER, 1760-1832
to the men, and did not deter other employers with longer
purses from taking the risk of a lawsuit. 1
The depression in the stocking trade during the early years
of the nineteenth century was in part relieved by the growth
of the lace trade, which started as an offshoot of the frame-
work knitters' industry, and was developing upon different
and more prosperous lines. From 1760 onwards, the more
ingenious minds in the stocking trade had exercised them-
selves over the problem of adapting the stocking frame to
the making of lace net. A point net machine by which
cushion lace with its six equal sides could be imitated, was
finally patented (not by its original inventor) in 1778 ; little
use, however, was made of it till it fell into the hands of the
Messrs. Haynes, keen business men, who towards the end of
the century introduced certain modifications, and made a
great commercial success of their point net lace. The point
net lace trade had risen to considerable prosperity by 1810,
and it was estimated that there were over 1500 point net
frames in Nottingham. 2
After 1810 the demand fell off, and hard hit by the com-
petition of other methods of making lace, the manufacturers,
to cheapen production, resorted to the original form of point
net, called ' single press,' an inferior article which unravelled
easily, and which held a position analogous to that of ' cut-
ups ' in the hosiery trade. According to Mr. Haynes, the
chief manufacturer of point net, the lace hands objected to
the single press point, not on account of the price, but because
of its inferior quality. 8 It was against ' cut-ups ' and ' single-
press lace,' as well as against low wages and the evils of the
truck system, that the Luddite campaign was directed. As
this campaign is described in a separate chapter, it is un-
necessary to discuss it here, further than to say that the
main results were that one thousand frames were broken, and
wages raised, for a short period, 2s. a week.
At the end of the Luddite disturbances the energy of the
frame-work knitters was concentrated on the effort to
obtain Parliamentary regulation for the programme which
1 Felkin, op. cit. y pp. 435, 436. 2 Felkin, op. cit., pp. 138, 139.
* H.O., 42. 131. Felkin evidently thought the objection justified. 'Incon-
sequence of the falling off of demand and to cheapen the article, it was made
again of single press in 1811 ; and still further to lessen the cost of cotton point
net, single yarn was used. This completed the ruin of the manufacture in Eng-
land. By 1815 the demand had entirely ceased here ' (Felkin, op. cit. , p. 140).
FRAME-WORK KNITTERS
they had partially enforced by their campaign of frame break-
ing. Mr. Coldham, the Town Clerk of Nottingham, drew a
sad picture of the terror-stricken state of the masters, afraid
to lay their views before the House of Commons. 1 He might
well have spared his pity, for the masters were to find firm
advocates in the Lords. The Bill, which was termed a Bill
' For preventing Frauds and Abuses in the Frame- Work
Knitting Manufacture, and in the payment of persons employed
therein/ in its first form prohibited the making of obnoxious
cheap goods (notably * cut-ups ') both in hosiery and lace
work, ordered the masters to fix schedules of prices for
different classes of goods, and forbade the payment of wages in
truck. By the end of its career in the Commons the references
to hosiery had dropped out except in so far as truck was con-
cerned. The Bill passed the Commons in spite of a long
speech against all interference with trade by Hume, 2 but in
the Lords its life was short, and it was rejected on July 24,
after speeches against it by Lauderdale, Liverpool, Holland
and Sidraouth. 3 No voice was raised in its favour, and Sid-
mouth ' trusted in God that no such principle would be
again attempted to be introduced in any Bill brought up to
that House.'
The disappointment amongst the frame-work knitters
was keen. Delegates from Leicester and Nottingham had
been up in London to support the Bill, 4 and there was a
general movement towards united action, as we learn from an
intercepted letter from a frame-work knitter in London to
a friend in Glasgow, announcing that Godalming, Dublin,
London, and Derby had formed societies for the maintenance
of their trade, and hoping that Glasgow would ' follow the
noble example.' *
Their hopes defeated, their funds exhausted by the Par-
liamentary campaign, the frame-work knitters might not
unnaturally have resorted again to frame breaking. Instead
of this, largely under the influence of Gravener Benson,*
1 H.O., 42. 123. * Hansard, Jary ai, 1812. /*., Tmry 24* 1812.
4 H.O., 40. i. H.O., 42. 124-
* Gravener Henson was a bobbin-net maker of Nottingham and leader of
Frame- Work Knitters' Combinations. He prepared an elaborate Bill in concert
with George White, a clerk of Committees of the House of Commons, repealing
Combination Acts, with some oonstractive industrial proposals. His Bill was
introduced by Peter Moore, M.P. for Coventry (see Webb, History tf TrmJt
Unicnitm, p. 89.)
230 THE SKILLED LABOURER, 1760-1832
who, after witnessing the defeat of the Bill, had been urged
by the members for Nottingham, ' to soothe and moderate
the public mind,' 1 they set themselves to form a closer and
more efficient combination than any they had yet achieved.
The Articles and General Regulations were framed with the
utmost care in 1813. Report said that the plan of associa-
tion had been drawn up by counsel of great eminence, namely
Sir S. Romilly and Mr. Samuel Marryatt, so that it should
be kept within the bounds of the law. 2 It was called by the
unobjectionable name of a society ' for obtaining parliamentary
relief and the encouragement of Mechanics in the improve-
ment of Mechanism.' 8
The combination was a federation of societies, each con-
sisting of not less than thirty and not more than one hundred
members, and a hierarchy of committees was established
for the different districts with an executive committee in
Nottingham at their head. The districts which it was pro-
posed to cover comprised not only the Midlands, but London,
Godalming, Tewkesbury, Scotland and Ireland. A General
Conference for representatives from Central Committees
in Nottinghamshire, Derby and Leicester was to be held
annually, and a General National Conference attended by
a deputy from every ' Central Committee in the Empire '
was to be held every three years. The rules were mainly
occupied with the constitution of the Society, and the rela-
tions of the different committees to one another. The coat
of arms of the Society represented the different districts
concerned, with the device of a loom and an arm holding
a hammer with the motto, ' Taisez vous.' These arms were
omitted from the second set of tickets issued to members
since they were supposed to arouse suspicion. 4
A good many wild ideas were current about this new organisa-
tion which started on its career in January 1813. It is agreed
by certain individuals at Nottingham, wrote one enthusiastic
informant, ' that the Constitution of this Club is founded
upon the Methodist system of Wesley, and this particularly
struck one of my friends as a convincing proof that Latham
who is a Methodist was one.' 6 The Union was also credited
with instigating the spasmodic attempts at frame breaking
which still occurred from time to time, and which were as
1 H.O., 42. 166. 2 H.O., 42. 139-
* For constitution of Society see H.O., 42. 137, and 42. 139.
* H.O., 42- 135- 5 H.0.,42. 138.
FRAME-WORK KNITTERS 231
a matter of fact contrary to its policy. The Minutes of the
first Central Conference of the Society, held some time in
1813, are among the Home Office Papers. 1 Deputies from the
three Midland hosiery counties were present, and the figures
given show that the total membership in these districts and
in London (27 members) and Godalming (70 members) was
2390, whilst the funds in hand were 195 in all, including
126 in Nottingham, and 1 in London. Ten out of the fifteen
resolutions passed deal with the establishment of Houses
of Call in each place where a Society exists, * for the better
convenience and information of the taking and letting of
Frames, and for the obtaining more certain employ for
Members.' Each House of Call in fact was to act as a sort
of employment bureau, keeping a list of frames, of work
and of workers.
The Society embarked on a striking and novel plan of
action. In November 1813, ' The Societies hire all the un-
employed frames and engage all the work they can which
they let out to their members but to no other person, if a
member has employment elsewhere with which he is dissatisfied,
the Society make him a weekly allowance until he finds better
Employment either from the Society or other persons.' 2
* The main prop of their Exchequer,' wrote Mr. Coldham in
July 1814, after examining the papers and accounts of the
Society, ' has been borrowing Money for the purpose of being
applied to Manufacturing, and by this means they have pro-
duced a great many Silk Hose which are now sent to London
to be sold.' 3
The Societies of course only acted incidentally as pro-
ducers, their main object was to keep up the standard of
wages, and for eighteen months they met with consider-
able success. First one and then another branch pressed
for an advance. Lace hands, we read, are not to make a
claim on the funds, ' till the grievances of the Plain Trade
is redressed ' ; again the plain two needle branch are to
have their grievances redressed before those of the plain
three needle branch are taken in hand. 4 Amongst the Home
Office Papers is the copy of a letter, dated June 16, 1814, from
a Nottingham frame-work knitter to a frame-work knitter
in Dumfries. 6 This letter came into the hands of the Pro-
1 H.O., 42. 139. * Mr. Woodcock, H.O., 42. 135.
H.O., 42. 140. 4 Ibid.
6 Ibid.
232 THE SKILLED LABOURER, 1760-1832
curator-Fiscal of Dumfries, who sent it to the Town Clerk of
Nottingham. It runs as follows :
'NOTTINGHAM, June 16, 1814.
1 SIR, Having seen a letter you have sent to your Brother
Timothy explaining the Disposition of the Trade of Dumfries to
join their Friends in England in uniting themselves under the
Union, I feel it my Duty to give you every Information on the
Subject. You will see by the Articles that the intent of the
Institution is to unite every branch for the support of each other
in times of Distress. The Institution has been found to be very
beneficial to every branch, as we have all received a small advance
on our work except the Plain Silk Hands, which we are now con-
tending for ; We have had 300 hands out of employ for more than
six weeks because the Hosiers have not the honour to give a
reasonable advance. The Hosiers have formed a powerful Com-
bination against us, but this we have not cared for, we have
persevered, and resolved to persevere until we accomplish the
object in view which we hope is not far distant.
' The Union is well-established in Nottingham, Derby and their
Counties, and is making very rapid progress throughout Leicester-
shire, London, Godalming, Tewkesbury and Northamptonshire
have all formed themselves, and we have long wished to form an
Interest in North Britain in order that the principle may be
diffused throughout the North ; and we are happy to find that
Dumfries is anctious to set the example, and hope when you have
formed yourselves you will disseminate the principle through all
Scotland, for depend upon it if the Trade are united and true to
their own Interest, we shall be able to make our Trade as respect-
able as any other in the Kingdom and no longer be designated by
the application of" Stracking Stockingers." According to request
I have sent four Articles and sixty Diplomas that you may form
yourselves as soon as possible. ... I hope you will excuse us
not writing sooner as we are now so throng, we have scarcely time
to|attend to anything but the Turn Out. S. SIMPSON.
1 N.B. Direct for me Newtons Head, Glasshouse Lane, Notting-
ham.'
It was the conflict in the plain silk branch mentioned in
this letter that proved the ruin of the men's Union. 1 In April
1814 the men demanded an advance in the wages for plain
silk hose. On April 21 a ' large and respectable meeting of
Hosiers ' in London, composed no doubt of representatives of
houses in Nottingham and elsewhere, decided to refuse any such
advance, and to form a Society for prosecuting frame breakers
instead. Now Messrs. Ray, the chief makers of plain silk
1 For the account of the collapse of the men's Union that follows, see the
papers in H.Q. , 42. 139, and 42. 140.
FRAME-WORK KNITTERS 238
hose in Nottingham, found themselves in what Mr. Coldham
called ' an unpleasant Predicament,' for they * had proposed,
in consequence of an Engagement as I believe with their
Workmen to do so, the very Advance which the Combina-
tion demanded, and which the great body of the trade had
refused to grant to the Frame-Work Knitters.' Under pres-
sure from their fellow employers they went back on their
word, and refused the increase. Unlike most hosiers they
owned few frames themselves, the bulk of their work being
done on ' independent ' frames. The Union on April 24
called out Messrs. Ray's men, amounting to two hundred or
three hundred, and proceeded to give them strike pay, or else
to employ them on making silk hose to be sold by the Union.
Messrs. Ray suffered a heavy blow by this desertion of their
men, and even wished to give in and keep their word, but after
many negotiations and * clashing opinions ' were persuaded to
throw in their lot with their fellow employers.
The hosiers at Nottingham had previously founded a Secret
Committee of which Mr. Coldham, the town clerk, acted
as secretary. It was decided by this masters' combination
to pursue all legal means to break up the men's combination,
and to refuse employment to any workmen who had struck
for an advance in wages, * or who are otherwise engaged in
this illegal combination.' The Law Officers had given it
as their opinion that the men's society was illegal, but had
added that it was useless to prosecute until persons could
be found to become members of the different societies in
order to give information. 1 The committees set themselves
to obtain such information, but, wrote Mr. Coldham, it is
* inconceivable the difficulty there is in getting amongst
Frame-Work Knitters upon whom you can depend to obtain
information for you, and no other person can be of the smallest
use.' A more hopeful plan of crushing the men's resistance
was suggested by the Secret Committee of Hosiers on May
23, after the turn out had lasted a month, namely, that the
Leicester, Nottingham and Derby Regiments of Militia should
be disbanded. This, as Mr. Coldham pointed out, would
largely increase the number of hands wanting work. If
these new hands worked for the masters at the old rates it
would become more difficult for the manufacturing committee
1 H.O., 42. 137. By the mere fact of having different branches the Society
was illegal according to 39 Geo. in. c. 79, ' An Act for the Suppression of
Seditious and Treasonable Societies.'
234 THE SKILLED LABOURER, 1760-1832
of men to dispose of their own goods ; if, on the other hand,
the new hands joined the Combination, the Society must
either find them work or support them. This suggestion
was evidently acted on.
The long struggle was exhausting the men's resources ;
their own funds were insufficient to support them, and collec-
tions were organised through the district. A copy of the
men's accounts in the Home Office Papers shows that between
April 25 and July 4, 1814, no less than 1302 passed through
their hands, mostly collections and subscriptions. In addi-
tion there is a mention of a book containing an account of
the money lent for carrying on the manufacturing of silk
hose. The masters waited to deal their blow till the process
of exhaustion was sufficiently advanced, and early in July
they judged the moment propitious. Action was taken
nominally by Mr. Ray, in reality by the Secret Committee.
Mr. Ray's master hands, summoned to answer the charge
of neglecting their work, proved a disappointment, almost
all being ' devoted to the Combination.' Some of the journey-
men, however, were taken up on secret information, and from
one of these information was obtained against three of the
leading members of the men's committee. One of the three,
Samuel Simpson, writer of the letter quoted above, escaped
from the district, the other two, George Gibson and Thomas
Judd, were convicted of collecting money for illegal purposes.
* As this,' wrote Mr. Coldham, on July 7, 1814, ' was the first
prosecution under the Combinations Act, it was not thought
politic to push the conviction up to the full extent,' either
by prosecutors or magistrates, and one month's hard labour
was the sentence imposed. The books and papers of the
combination had all been seized.
The sentence though blamed by some as too lenient did its
work. The Union, unable to stand against the opposing forces,
broke up, and its collapse was followed by a recrudescence
of frame breaking. A letter written by Mr. Coldham on
August 12, whether in his capacity as town clerk or as
secretary of the Secret Committee is not stated, is a signi-
ficant commentary on the situation. ' I have the pleasure
to assure you that I regard the resumption of the Practice
of Frame breaking as a strong and decisive Evidence of the
Disorganisation of the System of Combination as applied
for the purpose of accomplishing an Increase of Wages. I
consider that this has been effected by the joint aid of a
FRAME-WORK KNITTERS 285
depressed Trade, of an increasing supply of Labourers in the
Manufactory from the Discharge of the Militia Regiments
of the Manufacturing Districts, and of the Confusion and
Dismay occasioned by the Seizure of the Books and Papers
of the Committee of the Combination.' l
The collapse of the ' Society for obtaining Parliamentary
Relief ' made the men despair of obtaining redress by orderly
methods. Gravener Henson, with his policy of clubs and
combinations and his hostility to violence was discredited, 2
and a small section of frame breakers, who did not scruple
to use personal violence when any of their body got into
trouble, revived the policy of 1811, and continued it till the
bloodstained retribution which followed the destruction of
lace machines in Heathcoat's Loughborough factory closed
the epoch of Luddism. ' The branch who broke the frames,'
said Gravener Henson afterwards in 1824, 3 ' never contem-
plated any such thing as the combining ; they broke them
merely because it was the only means that presented itself
of rescuing themselves, as they conceived, from the com-
binations of their masters.'
It would be a mistake however to think that the whole
body of frame-work knitters now turned to frame breaking.
A spy was at last found by Mr. Coldham in March 1815, who,
for the wages of 2, 2s. a week, 4 was willing to send in descrip-
tions of the inconsequent and irresponsible talk at public-
houses, in which projects of revolution and reform, proposals
for frame breaking and for prosecutions of masters under the
Truck Act, and petty personal quarrels are wound together in
inextricable confusion. In one of these reports the secret agent
writes of the would-be Revolutionaries, ' there is somebody
concerting a plan and will make it known in proper time,
but I cannot learn who these persons are, and I think they
1 H.O. , 42. 152. This letter has by mistake been placed amongst the papers
of 1816.
1 See Gravener Henson's evidence before Committee on Artisans and
Machinery, 1824, p. 282 : ' In order to prevent the breaking machinery, which
generally ended in some other cause of vengence, I advised them to form clubs
and combinations' ; and his letter to Sidmouth, June 10, 1817 (H.O. , 42. 166) :
1 1 have offended the more desperate Luddites whom I have been informed
have repeatedly threatened to shoot me for counteracting their designs, and for
the freedom of language I have used at various times against their practices.'
s Committee on Artisans and Machinery, 1824, p. 281.
4 H.O., 42. 143.
236 THE SKILLED LABOURER, 1760-1832
don't know.' x When Mr. Coldham died early in 1816 Mr.
Enfield, who like his predecessor combined the offices of
town clerk and secretary to the Secret Committee of Employers,
continued to send up reports from time to time to the Home
Office.
Gravener Henson himself now devoted his untiring energies
to organising prosecutions of the masters under the Truck
Act. In two test cases against ' two very respectable
tradesmen ' in 1816, the men were successful, and much
alarm was created among the masters, whose contention, as
stated by an apologist in a letter to the Home Office, 2 was
that when overstocked with their own goods ' they barter
with other tradesmen for such goods as they know their men
will be wanting,' and that if informations were laid on a big
scale, and the system stopped, thousands of men would be
thrown out of work. In the two cases tried, it may be re-
marked, the goods in which the men were paid happened
to be frames which the men certainly did not want. Henson