Chris Corker

The business and technology of the Sheffield Armaments industry 1900-1930 CORKER, Christopher John Available from the Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive (SHURA) at: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/15579/ A Sheffield Hallam University thesis This thesis is protected by copyright which belongs to the author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. Please visit http://shura.shu.ac.uk/15579/ and http://shura.shu.ac.uk/information.html for further details about copyright and re-use permissions. The Business and Technology of the Sheffield Armaments Industry 1900-1930 Christopher John Corker A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Sheffield Hallam University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy November 2016 Abstract This exploration of the Sheffield armaments industry focuses on four in-depth case studies of John Brown, Cammell-Laird, Thomas Firth and Hadfields to examine the business and technology of the industry. It builds on the work of Tweedale and Trebilcock on Sheffield and armaments, and advances the argument that during the period of study from 1900 to 1930, the city was one of the most important centres for armaments research and production anywhere in the world. The business of the armaments industry is explored through an examination of the evolving links the industry had with the Government against the backdrop of an uncertain trading environment, and the managerial connections established between the state and private industry. Also explored are the collaborative, collusive and independent defensive measures enacted by the industry to counter uncertainty in the industry, through collaborative business arrangements and various approaches to entering international markets for armaments. An examination of the business of the armaments industry also highlights the value of the technological investment made by the industry. At the centre of exploring the technology of the armaments industry, a reconstruction of its technological history is undertaken using patent and archival records, highlighting the nuances and research dead-ends of development in the industry. Of central importance is the notion of spin-off and the interactions between armaments and metallurgical developments in the creation of a pool of knowledge to be utilised for future research into alloy steels, and the notion of path-dependent technological research. Also advanced is the concept of an innovation system centred on Sheffield, and an exploration of the important national and international links advanced by the industry. i Acknowledgements With any large project there are many people who have assisted along the way, and I apologise for any omissions. In history at Sheffield Hallam I would like to thank my supervisors Merv Lewis and Roger Lloyd-Jones for their assistance during the production of the thesis. Also at Sheffield Hallam a number of friends and colleagues from across the university have offered their support during my studies, including Mike Bramhall, Alison McHale, Anne Nortcliffe, Chris Short, Chris Hopkins, Christine O‟Leary, Manny Madriaga, and the late Dave Cotton. I would also like to thank my colleagues at the York Management School for their continued support, especially Simon Mollan, Kevin Tennent, Phil Garnett, Shane Hamilton, Matthew Hollow, Alex Gillett, Bill Cooke, Simon Sweeney, Beatrice D‟Ippolito, and Bob Doherty. Elsewhere, I would like to thank Sarah Holland at Nottingham University for her continued advice, support and friendship, James Fenwick at DeMontfort University who has offered an independent view of the research since its commencement, Joe Lane at the London School of Economics for intellectually stimulating discussions on knowledge and industrial districts, and Dan Spence at the University of the Free State, South Africa, for support and advice in the early days of the research. Thanks also go to participants at conferences in York, Sheffield, Lancaster and Montreal for their feedback on various elements of the research; to Jo Osborne for assisting in the design of the diagrams in the work, and for taking the time to interpret my hand-drawn versions; and to the staff at Sheffield Archives, Sheffield Local Studies Library, Kelham Island Archive, and Wirral Archives Service, without whom this research would not have been possible. Finally I would like to thank my family for their continued encouragement since the commencement of my studies, my parents John and Yvonne, brother Philip and his partner Charlotte, and especially to my fiancée Hollie, who has stuck by me through the highs and lows of the entire project and offered unconditional support and love at all times, despite hearing more about armour piercing projectiles than anyone ever should. ii Candidates Statement The objectives of this research were as follows. Using four case studies, the research set out to examine the technological development of armaments, the industrial district in which the Sheffield armaments industry was situated, the marketing involved and the connections developed to home and foreign governments by members of the industry, and the specialised management required for armaments research, production, and marketing, across the period 1900-1930. To achieve this, the archival business records and patents of the case studies were consulted. Published sources have been referenced throughout with footnote citations and are included in the bibliography in full. iii Contents Introduction 1 Chapter 1: Armaments Technology 1900-1914 – The Evolution of the 28 Armour Piercing Projectile Chapter 2: Armaments Technology 1900-1914 – Armour, Metallurgy 66 and Innovation Systems Chapter 3: Business, Marketing and Special Relationships – Armourers 94 and the British Government 1900-1914 Chapter 4: Defence against Uncertainty – Director Networks, 139 Collaboration and International Business 1900-1914 Chapter 5: Technological Development in War and Peace 1914-1930 169 Chapter 6: The Business and Management of Armaments 1914-1930 201 Conclusion 242 Appendix A: List of Patents used in the Study 248 Appendix B: Hadfields‟ and Firth‟s British Government Projectile 255 Orders 1900-1914 Appendix C: Hadfields‟ and Firth‟s British Government Projectile 265 Orders 1920-1930 Appendix D: Brown‟s Monthly Armour Orders 1904-1924 271 Bibliography 272 iv List of Tables Table 3.1: Allocation of Naval and War Office Orders to Ordnance 96 Factories and the Trade 1899-1914 Table 3.2: Allocation of Armament Orders to Ordnance Factories and 97 the Trade 1905-1913 Table 3.3: Allocation of Projectile Orders to Ordnance Factories and 98 the Trade 1905-1913 Table 3.4: Hadfields‟ Directors 1900-1914, and directors who continued 100 1914 Table 3.5: Brown‟s Directors 1900-1914, and directors who continued 104 1914 Table 3.6: Firth‟s Directors 1900-1914, and directors who continued 104 1914 Table 3.7: Cammell‟s Directors 1900-1914, and directors who 106 continued 1914 Table 3.8: Cammell‟s Sheffield Works (Cyclops, Grimesthorpe, 114 Penistone) Invoiced Output, Profit and Dividends 1900-1913 Table 3.9: Cammell‟s Profits on Armour Sales at Cyclops Works West 116 Forge 1900-1913 Table 3.10: Cammell‟s Output Of Armour Over 2” thick, West Forge 116 Cyclops Works 1911-1914 Table 3.11: Brown‟s Atlas Works Invoiced Output, Profit and Dividends 117 1900-1914 Table 3.12: Summary of Brown‟s Armour Orders 1904-1914 118 Table 3.13: Brown‟s Armour Production Costs 1906-1911 119 Table 3.14: Hadfields‟ Turnover, Profits and Dividends 1897-1913 122 Table 3.15: Hadfields‟ Work Invoiced and Average Value Per Ton Of 124 Output Table 3.16: Hadfields‟ Armaments Work As A Proportion Of Total 124 Output Table 3.17: Hadfields‟ Invoiced Output For British Army and Navy 128 1900-1914 Table 3.18: Hadfields-British Admiralty Shell Prices 1911 130 Table 3.19: Firth‟s Sales, Profit and Dividends 1899-1913 131 v Table 3.20: Firth‟s British Government Projectile Orders 1900-August 132 1914 Table 3.21: Cammell‟s Shell Orders From British Government, 1900- 135 1914 Table 3.22: Cammell‟s Shell Plant Profits and Losses 1910-1914 135 Table 4.1: Brown-Cammell-Firth-COW Network Cross Directorships To 144 1914 Table 4.2: Firth‟s Foreign Customers for Projectiles 1906-1913 160 Table 4.3: Firth‟s Italian Shell Orders, 1906-1913 161 Table 4.4: Hadfields‟ Foreign Projectile Orders 1909-August 1914 164 Table 4.5: Hadfields‟ Imperial Japanese Navy Orders 1909-August 165 1914 Table 6.1: Admiralty Expenditure on Armaments 1920-1930, and 207 Proportion to Trade (£m) Table 6.2: Capacity to be Retained for Weekly Projectile Production at 212 Hadfields and Firth, 1922-1930 Table 6.3: Brown‟s Atlas Works Invoiced Output, Profit and Dividends 215 1914-1930 Table 6.4: Summary of Brown‟s Armour Orders 1915-1924 217 Table 6.5: Brown‟s Armour Sales and Production 1915-1930 218 Table 6.6: Cammell‟s Sheffield Works (Cyclops, Grimesthorpe, 219 Penistone) Invoiced Output, Profit and Dividends 1914-1928 Table 6.7: Cammell‟s Production and Profits on Armour Sales at 221 Cyclops Works West Forge 1914-1928 Table 6.8: Cammell‟s Production and Profits on Shell Sales at 221 Grimesthorpe Works 1914-1921 Table 6.9: Firth‟s Sales, Profit and Dividends 1914-1930 222 Table 6.10: Hadfields‟ Invoiced Output, Profits and Dividends 1915- 223 1930 Table 6.11: Hadfields‟ Armour Piercing Projectile

Load more