Bourgeois Aspirations: a Biographical Sketch of Hector Ledru, Manufacturer and Inventor (1798 to 1876)

ZUG 2017; 62(2): 257–297

Dirk HR Spennemann* Bourgeois Aspirations: A biographical sketch of Hector Ledru, manufacturer and inventor (1798 to 1876)

DOI 10.1515/zug-2017-1001

Abstract: During the first half of the nineteenth century, the French economy underwent a major technological change, with small and medium-scale entrepreneurs driving the industrialisation by developing and exploiting new technologies. This paper examines the life of one such entrepreneur, Hector Ledru (ca. 1798 to 1876), who started out in the sugar industry of the post Napoleonic era. He soon morphed into an entrepreneur exploiting patents in the manufacture of wooden barrel manufacture, galvanised iron and metal pipes, before he settled on the manufacture and installation of central heating systems. Ledru serves as an example of the archetypical small and later medium-scale entrepreneur making his way in post Napoleonic France, never reaching national fame, but all the way adjusting to the various social and economic circumstances.

Introduction

A substantial body of literature has examined the emergent French industrialisation during the early and middle part of the 19th century.1 There appears to be consensus that the French path of industrialisation differed from that of the United Kingdom and the United States of America, due to both social constraints, and retarded infrastructure development. As a further important difference the conservative attitude of French entrepreneurs has been mentioned together with a lack of investment capital for start-up companies,2 in part caused

1 Maurice Levy-Leboyer/Francois Bourguignon, The French economy in the nineteenth century: an essay in econometric analysis, Cambridge 1990; Colin Heywood, The Development of the French Economy 1750–1914, Cambridge 1995; François Caron, Histoire économique de la France, XIXe- XXe siècles, Paris 1995; Michael Stephen Smith, The Emergence of Modern Business Enterprise in France, 1800–1930, Cambridge 2006. 2 David Landes, French Entrepreneurship and Industrial Growth in the Nineteenth Century, in: The Journal of Economic History (1949),45–61.

* Adresse des Autors: Univ.-Prof Dr. Dirk HR Spennemann, Institute for Land, Water and Society; Charles Sturt University; PO Box 789; Albury NSW 2640, Australia, Email: [email protected] 258 Dirk HR Spennemann by huge war reparations in consequence of the defeat of Napoleonic France.3 Innovation, however, was not stagnant, as French scientists and engineers invented a range of revolutionary technologies, from gas lighting and galvanised iron, to spinning machines and artificial dyes.4 While these technologies all contributed to the local and national industrial development,5 they ultimately flourished outside France. The period from the 1830s to the 70s saw the most dramatic change. In France it was an age when one scientific discovery followed the other and when inventions were patented at unprecedented rates.6 The 1840s and 50s, in particular, were a period of major, yet gradual transition from individual small-scale arti- sanal production to either larger factories or to organized co-operating entities. While the gradual mechanisation of production, which accelerated in the 1850s and 60s, was a major contributor, it could only have an effect if the entrepreneurs espoused new ways of manufacture and thus were willing (and had the capital) to invest in such factory infrastructure. The re-design of Paris and the concomitant building boom and the associated modernisation of construction technologies, materials and processes percolated to other urban centres. While the Central and Departmental governments played a major role in the economic development through the award of contracts, as well as the imposition (or absence) of tariffs and taxes, central to the economic development were in- dividuals who acted as agents of change: scientists, inventors and entrepreneurs. An entrepreneurʼs interest in innovation counted for naught if he was unable to raise the required capital, or if his actions contravened or were constrained by social norms. During the 1830s to 60s, France underwent a social change with the emergence of the self-made man, homo novus. In the shifting social framework, up and coming entrepreneurs, rising above their status, found themselves caught between opposing forces. The emerging industrialist bourgeoisie, which was shaping its own destiny, had to compete with to compete with, and differentiate

3 Eugene N. White, Making the French pay: The costs and consequences of the Napoleonic reparations, in: European Review of Economic History 5 (2001), 337–365. 4 See Leslie Tomory, Progressive Enlightenment: The Origins of the Gaslight Industry, 1780–1820, Cambridge 2010, 50f.; idem., Gaslight, distillation, and the Industrial Revolution, in: History of Science (2011), 397–424; Smith, The Emergence (cf. n. 1), 145, 230f.; H.W. Dickinson, A study of galvanised and corrugated sheet metal, in: Transactions of the Newcomen Society (1944), 27–36;. 5 As argued by F. Crouzet, The historiography of French economic growth in the nineteenth century, in: The Economic History Review (2003), 215–242. 6 The number of French patents issued per capita has been graphed by B. Zorina Khan, The Democratization of Invention: Patents and Copyrights in American Economic Development, 1790–1920, Cambridge 2005, 46 and shows an increase after 1825 and a rapid increase after 1845. Bourgeois Aspirations 259 themselves from the extreme manifestations of the capitalism of the nouveaux riches.7 In an age still characterised by the bipolar concepts of patrician and plebeian virtues, a new concept, that of bourgeois virtue,8 was gradually emerging, although it was not recognised as such at the time. Most businesspeople were confined with the existing social framework,9 which was further ex- acerbated by the dichotomy between Paris and regions. As businessmen held an inferior position in French society (as opposed to lawyers, administrators and the military and other notable professions), many felt a need to gain social respect- ability. While this could be facilitated by their own entrepreneurial prowess and reputation as reliable manufacturers, it required capital, which could be raised privately or on the stock market. David Landes discussed the role of the French entrepreneur and his influence on French industrial growth during the 19th century.10 Landes characterised the French entrepreneur as a small businessman acting for himself drawing credit from limited clientele of trusted friends, fundamentally conservative and independent. At the same time, as businessmen held an inferior position in French society, most entrepreneurs aspired for social upwards mobility through marriage into aristocracy, either themselves or their children.. To date, we have only very few examinations of such individual careers, with Thomasʼ study of Jean-François Cail being the most detailed.11 In this he showed how a technologically-aware entrepreneur acquired wealth which he could then use to good effect to acquire patents of emerging technologies (e.g. railway locomotives) that filled demand. Further wealth and reputation followed. Not all entrepreneurs, however, were as successful even though they too had unique opportunities presented to them. Some had to overcome self-inflicted hurdles, due to bad business decisions, such as ill-advised investments or pur- chase of patents of doubtful viability, as well as due plain mismanagement of unique opportunities. Some entrepreneurs gave up, while others refocussed their

7 Fernand Braudel, Histoire économique et sociale de la France, Paris 1976. 8 Sensu D. N. McCloskey, Bourgeois Virtue, in: American Scholar (1994), 177–191. 9 André Jardin/André-Jardin Tudesq, La France des notables: La vie de la nation, 1815–1848., Nouvelle histoire de la France contemporaine, Montrouge 1973; André-Jardin Tudesq, La France des notables: Lʼévolution générale, Nouvelle histoire de la France contemporaine, Montrouge 1973. 10 Landes, French Entrepreneurship (cf. n. 2). 11 Jean-Louis Thomas, Jean-Francois Cail. Un acteur majeur de la première révolution industrielle, Paris 2004. 260 Dirk HR Spennemann activities and rebuilt their businesses and careers. The following paper is a case study of one such entrepreneur.12

Hector Ledruʼs starting point

In an age where the vast majority of consumer goods were manufactured from a variety of plastics, it is hard to imagine the impact that something coarse and drab as galvanised, i. e. zinc-coated iron would have had on the nature and life-ex- pectancy of household goods and construction materials. While iron was a cheap, strong and ubiquitous material, it suffered from corrosion («rust») which severely limited its uses. The development of a commercially viable process to zinc-coat iron by Stanislas Sorel in 1837 dramatically improved corrosion resistance and thus significantly extended the use life of iron products. Not surprisingly, contemporary authors opined that the invention «bids fair to be one of the most important of the age».13 The original patent was granted, effective 10 May 1837, to Hector Ledru and Stanislas Sorel14 and is mentioned, in that same order of names, throughout most of the legal references. While Stanislas Tranquille Modeste Sorel (1803 to 1871) is well known as an inventor, with numerous awards and medals to his name, in- cluding the Legion dʼHonneur,15 comparatively little is known about Sorelʼs col- laborator, Hector Ledru. Who was he? As will become evident, unlike Sorel who was primarily an inventor who dabbled in the commercialisation of his inven-

12 The principal data that could be drawn on are patent records as published in the «Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France,», mentions of company registrations in the «Gazette des Tribu- naux,» listings in various address books, and the notifications in the «Bulletin de la Société d'Encouragement pour l'Industrie Nationale,» as well as commentary in the reports on the various national French industry exhibitions, which were held every five years in Paris: e.g. Cata- logue des Produits de lʼIndustrie Française, admis a lʼexposition publique dans le Palais du Louvre, Paris 1827 etc. 13 Galvanisation of Metals to Prevent their Oxydation; or Patent Processes for their Protection from Oxydation, by coating or covering them with zinc, in: Mechanics Magazine, Museum, Re- gister, Journal and Gazette30 (1839), 366–370. 14 Louis Philippe, Nº 6,994–Ordonnance du Roi proclamation des Brevets d'invention délivrés pendent le deuxiéme trimestre de 1837 au palais de Neuilly, le 15 juillet 1837, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France 15 (1838), 414–430, 428, No. 126 15 Alfred E. Beach, Stanislas Sorel, in: Scientific American10 (1871), 151; For a biographical sketch of Stanislas Sorel and list of patents and awards, see Dirk H.R. Spennemann, Inventing, Innovating and Investing: Biographical notes about the French inventor Stanislas Tranquille Mode- ste Sorel (1798–1876), Albury 2017. Bourgeois Aspirations 261 tions, Ledru was much more the aspiring entrepreneur, whose business relationships seem to have been very closely interwoven with his private life. Ledru was not a very prominent businessman and as such has, understandably escaped the attention of historians.16 Thus Ledru can be regarded as representative of many small and medium-scale entrepreneurs of the French bourgeoisie which flourished with a modicum of success during the July Monarchy under Louis Philippe. Hector Joseph Ledru was born about 1798 at Foucaucourt (Somme) as son of Joseph Philippe Robert Ledru and Victoire Cécile Bourdon.17 Philippe Ledru was a landowner and agricultural producer18 in Bullecourt, where he also served as mayor.19 Ledru is described as a patriotic ex-conscript soldier desirous to support his country.20 Hector Ledruʼs formative years occurred in the Napoleonic era, when France re-emerged from the turmoil of the Directorate that followed the French revolution. Atthe sametime,he hadtoexperiencethe deathof hisfatheratanageof15 or 16, probably due to suicide caused by a failed investment (see below).

The Sugar Connection

Determined to break Englandʼs monopoly on sugar, and in particular in response to the English blockade of French ports (from 1806), Napoléon Bonaparte pushed for the development of a national French sugar industry using sugar beets to overcome the blockade of British goods.21 On 1 September 1812 Philippe-Joseph

16 For example, he is not discussed in Barbierʼs work on the north of France during the Second Empire. Frédéric Barbier, Le patronat du Nord sous Second Empire: une approche prosopographi- que, Droz, 1989. 17 Amis du Vieux Brignais, Page principale de généalogie, http://amis-du-vieux-brignais.org/ Fichiersdusite/Genatoile/index.html, 2016 [last access 1 February, 2017]; Michel Leclerq, Généa- logie de Michel Leclerq. Ledru, http://gw.geneanet.org/michel17700?lang=fr&m=N&v=LEDRU, 2016 [last access 31 January 2017]. 18 «cultivateur-propriétaire». Auguste Parenty, Notice sur M Crespel-Delisse Fondateur de la sucerie indigène, in: Memoires de l'Académie Impériale des sciences, lettres et arts 2 (1868), 201–322. 19 Ledru was mayor of Bullecourt and justice of the Peace in 1807 Augustin Leducq and Augustin Allexandre, in: Annuaire statistique du départment du Pas-de-Calais pour l'an 1807, Paris 1807, 368, 376. 20 Parenty, Notice sur M Crespel-Delisse (cf. n. 18), 217. 21 C. Vivant, Histoire du sucre et les débuts de la culture de la betterave dans l'Aisne, in: Mémoires de la Fédération des sociétés dʼhistoire et dʼarchéologie de lʼAisne 9 (1963), 13–22; J.P. Besse/G. Marival, Cent ans d'industrie sucrière dans l'Aisne et dans l'Oise, in: Annales Historiques Com- piégnoises (1993), 21–32; Parenty, Notice (cf. n. 18). 262 Dirk HR Spennemann

Ledru and François Chardanne, a land-owner at Douai, were granted a licence to produce sugar in Arras (Pas-de-Calais). A week later, Ledru and Chardanne formed a company, with an initial duration of one year.22 Lacking experience, Ledru took advice from Louis-Jacques Thénard, professor of chemistry at the École Polytechnique, who had published on sugar production.23 In January 1813 the first sugar was produced ay Arras. Later that year, the factory was in full swing, producing a quantity of brown sugar, syrup and rum, and pressed loaves of crystallised sugar.24 But in his rush to establish a sugar factory, Ledru had overlooked environmental concerns. As the factory was located in a residential area of Arras, it attracted complaints regarding noise, dust and smoke. The local court sentenced Ledru to move the boilers and the graters away from the loca- tion.25 A relocation of the machinery meant a major financial impost. The sugar factory effectively only operated for two seasons after which Philippe Ledru was forced to declare bankruptcy. It can be surmised that the set up and initial operational costs, combined with the relative inefficiencies of being a newcomer to a new technology and the required relocation, reduced any possible profits.26 Philippe Ledru died at Bullecourt on 20 January 1814. Ribauxspeculates that Ledru committed suicide to maintain the family honour.27 On 16 March 1815 the factory was bought for 19,800 Francs by Crespel-Delisse, a sugar merchant from Lille,28 who not only restarted the works but also seems to have taken on Hector Ledru as an apprentice.29 Striking out on this own. Aged 29, Ledru first came to public attention in September 1827. At a dinner hosted by the city of Amiens for

22 Ledru acquired the former refuge of the Arrouaise Abby in Arras for Francs 12,000 on 19 September 1812. 23 See for example Paul Bellet, Le baron Louis-Jacques Thenard et les pharmaciens, in: Revue d'histoire de la pharmacie (1992), 407–410. 24 Augustin Leducq/Augustin Allexandre, Annuaire statistique du départment du Pas-de-Calais pour l'an 1814, Cleclerq-Cammiez 1814, 558. 25 Marie-Christine Allart, Histoire des industries agroalimentaires (IAA) dans le Nord-Pas-de-Ca- lais et dans le Cambrésis, http://www.mediathequedecambrai.fr/2012/02/28/histoire-des-industries-agroalimentaires-iaa-dans-le-nord-pas-de-calais-et-dans-le-cambrésis/ [last access 31 Janu- ary 2017]. 26 In an 1868 biography essay on Crespel-Delisse, Parenty sheets home Ledruʼs failure to suc- ceed squarely at Trénard. When Crespel-Delisse offered more appropriate technical advice, it was too late Parenty, Notice (cf. n. 18), 217. 27 Daniel Rimbaux, La sucrerie de Boisleux, http://rimbaux-kwasny.info/boisleuxaumont/artic- les.php?lng=fr&pg=166&prt=1. [last access 12 February 2017]. 28 It appears that Crespel-Delisse left a war-devastated Lille in 1814 and set up a sugar refinery in Arras. Parenty, Notice (cf. n. 18). 29 An 1827 manuscript annotation suggests that some level of family relationship may have existed between Hector Ledru and Crespel-Delisse. Bourgeois Aspirations 263

King Charles X, a large column of white sugar was exhibited as a table centre piece opposite the king. Charles X commented favourably on the quality of the sugar.30 That event was re-reported in various newspapers throughout France and even abroad.31 As far as can be ascertained, Ledru seems to have been involved in owning or running the sugar works at Franvillers (Somme) since at least 1825.32 In 1827 Ledru exhibited some of his sugar at the Paris national industrial exhibition,33 for which he was awarded a silver medal by the Société d'Encour- agement pour l'Industrie, «both for the products and for the perfection that he has given his devices.»34 The latter suggests that Ledru had been engaged in advan- cing the sugar making technology in some way. Warmé, in his 1828 essay on the sugar beet industry of the Somme,35 noted that Jeremiah Spencer, a British Quaker, had interested Ledru in the anti-slavery movement and that Ledru helped to distribute an anti-slavery publication.36 The fact that no further record can be found, however, suggests that Ledru, although prominent in the sugar industry of the Somme, was less interested in the anti- slavery issue out of conviction but more out of self-interest. After all, the cheap la- bour available to the owners of the Caribbean sugar cane plantations meant lower import prices for sugar that competed with Ledruʼs own sugar made from sugar beet.37

30 It appears that the column made up of crystals of different kinds of sugar, with the pedestal made from raw sugar. Four candied sugar beets were place at the corners of the base of the structure. Interiéur, in: Journal Politique et littéraire de Tolouse et de la Haute-Garonne 15 (1771), 1.827, 2. 31 France, in: Journal des débats politiques et littéraires (23 September 1827), 3; Interiéur (cf. n. 47), France, in: Journal de Rouen et du Department de la Seine-inferieure 276 (1827), 2f.; France, in: Le Propagateur 10 (1827), 3f., Verschiedenes, in: Allgemeine Handlungs-Zeitung 34 (1827), 507f.; Paris, in: Leipziger Zeitung (29 September 1827), 2.822f.; News, in: Salisbury and Winches- ter Journal (1 October 1827), 2; Noticias extrangeras, in: Gaceta de Madrid, (30 October 1827), 525f. 32 A September 1830 reference notes that a Hilaire Boye had been an employee of Ledruʼs sugar plant for five and a half years Société d'Encouragement pour l'Industrie Nationale, Médailles décernées aux contre-maitres des ateliers d'industrie Française, Mme Huzard, 1831. 14. A sugar beet processing plant owned by a Ledru is on record since 1814 Leducq and Allexandre, Annuaire statistique du départment du Pas-de-Calais pour l'an 1814, 558. 33 Catalogue des Produits (cf. n. 12), 52, no 332. 34 Héricart-Ferrand de Thury and Migneron, Rapport sur les produits de l'industrie (cf. n. 44), 414. 35 Originally published in 1828 as an essay. Vulfranc Warmé, Culture de la Betteraves, in: Feuille dʼAffiche; reprinted in Vulfranc Warmé, Opuscules. Dernier Hommage, Paris 1835, 393ff. 36 Runkelrüben-Zucker, in: Allgemeine Handlungs-Zeitung 35 (1828), 106. 37 From ancillary evidence, such as the 1828 court case brought against Ledru by the boiler- maker Neyrat, we can infer that Ledru was a major employer in the sugar beet industry. Charles Ledru, Précis pour le sieur Hector Ledru contre le sieur Neyrat, Paris 1828. 264 Dirk HR Spennemann

With an annual output of 24.5 tons of sugar, and with 25.2 hectares under sugar beet cultivation, Ledru et Cie at Franvillers was a medium-sized sugar producer in 1827.38 The level of mechanisation at Ledruʼs factory is noted re- peatedly.39 Ledru et Cie is listed among a large number of sugar manufacturers operating in 1829–30.40 By 1831 the works seem to have been running sufficiently well that they could be left in the hands of a foreman, Hilaire Boye, while Ledru occupied himself in running other factories.41 Indeed, already in 1828 Ledru, together with Edouard Bertin,42 opened a second plant which operated as Ledru et Bertin at Roye.43 By 1835 that factory, then trading as Ledru et Cie, processed about 150,000 pounds of beet per day.44 In 1829 Ledru became a founding share-holder in the sugar factory at Francières, which he and Bertin established there with a broad range of investors (trading as

38 For 1827 data see Über Runkelrüben-Zuckerfabrikation in Frankreich, in: Jahrbücher der Kö- niglich Bayerischen Landwirthschaftlichen Lehr-Anstalten zu Schleißheim (1828), 457–462; Lud- wig Zierl, Wird die Runkelrüben-Zuckerfabrication in Bayern auf's Neue aus dem Grabe auferste- hen, und sich zum allgemeinen Gewerbe gestalten?, in: Correspondenz-Blatt des Landwirthschaft- lichen Vereins Triptolemea in Schleißheim 2 (1830), 151–179; Über Runkelrüben- Zuckerfabrikation in Frankreich, in: Kunst- und Gewerbeblatt des Polytechnischen Vereins für das Königreich Bayern 14 (1828), 388–394; Über Runkelrüben-Zuckerfabrikation in Frankreich, in: Neues und Nutzbares aus dem Gebiete der Haus- und Landwirtschaft und der dieselben för- dernden Natur- und Gewerbskunde 6 (1828), 89–92; Über Runkelrüben-Zuckerfabrikation in Frankreich, in: Dingler's Polytechnisches Journal 28 (1828), 415–417. 39 Ludwig Zierl, Ueber den gegenwärtigen Stand der Runkelrüben-Zucker-Fabrikation in Frank- reich, in: Kunst- und Gewerbe-Blatt des polytechnischen Vereins für das Königreich Bayern 18 (1832), 659–711; Augustin Pierre Dubrunfaut, Über die Fabrikation des Runkelrübenzukers, in: Dingler's Polytechnisches Journal 33 (1829), 169–222. 40 1828 Augustin Pierre Dubrunfaut, Mémoire sur la fabrication du sucre des betteraves, in: L'Industriel: journal principalement destiné à répandre les connaissances 5 (1829), 1–34; 1829– 30; Liste alphabetique des fabriques de sucre de betteraves qui ont travaillé pendant l'année 1829– 1830 comprenent en outre quelques-unes des farbriques qui sont en construction pour travailler pendent l'année 1830–1831, in: L'Agriculteur Manufacturier 3 (1830), 133–139. 41 In September 1830 Hilaire Boye, an employee of Ledruʼs for five and a half years, was awarded a medal by the Société d'Encouragement pour l'Industrie Nationale, Médailles décernées aux contre-maitres des ateliers d'industrie Française, 14, for running the Franvillers factory in Ledruʼs absence. 42 Bertin was «maître de la poste aux chevaux» at Roye. 43 Région Picardie, Sucrerie de betteraves Thirial Bertin et Compagnie, puis Sucrerie et Distillerie de Francières, Amiens 2015. https://inventaire.picardie.fr/dossier/sucrerie-de-betteraves-thirial- bertin-et-compagnie-puis-sucrerie-et-distillerie-de-francieres/ef08a390-dc4c-4932–9fd9– 9752e85e4f00 [last access 31 January 2016]. 44 The factory, which relied on steam power, had a cellar storage capable of three million pounds of beet reserves, which lasted about 20 to 30 days. Frankreich. Manchfaltiges, in: Asch- affenburger Zeitung (18 November 1835), 1.143f. Bourgeois Aspirations 265

Ledru, Bertin et fils).45 In April 1833, following a suggestion by Ledru, the factory at Franciers was purchased by Crespel-Delisse,46 who eventually also bought Ledruʼs Franvillers works.47 It is worth noting here that the careers of Hector Ledru and Jean-François Cail were quite similar up to this point. Both came from poor (Cail) or impoverished (Ledru) backgrounds, both were apprenticed in the sugar industry, both went on to own sugar manufacturing companies, and both had a major interest in technologies. Whereas as Cail stuck, at least for the time being, to sugar production and embraced and actively financed the competition in the Caribbean (thereby increasing his wealth), Ledru opposed the Caribbean sugar industry as he perceived it as a threat to his livelihood. Rather than facing the new (and in essence old) realties of sugar production, Ledru made some dubious investment choices.

The Montesson affair

Some light on Ledruʼs life during that period is shed by the proceedings of a court case relating to the Société Agricole et Industrielle de Montesson,avery public spat about company mismanagement.48 In 1833 Brame Chevalier had invented a process that used steam to heat the sugar syrup to the required temperature, while at the same time using hot air generated by the steam engine to agitate the syrup. In consequence, the yield of sugar from the same amount of sugar beet was almost doubled.49 In April 1833 Brame came to Paris

45 The investors were Pierre Alexandre Dauger, César Auguste Thirial, Edouard Bertin, Louis- Fortuné Vicomte de Riencourt, and Barthélemy-Léonard de Talloubre. Picardie, Sucrerie de betteraves (cf. n. 43). 46 Picardie, Sucrerie de betteraves (cf. n. 43). 47 Association pour la Sauvegarde de la Sucrerie de Francières, Les Grandes figures, http:// sucrerie-francieres.pagesperso-orange.fr/Pages2013/Figures.htm, 2015 [last access 31 January 2017). 48 The court case was reported in great depth in the Gazette des Tribunaux of 11, 12 and 21 May, as well as 1 June 1837. Tribunal de Commerce de la Seine. Audiences des 5, 15 avril et 3 mai, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 12, 3640 (1837), 668–672; Tribunal de Commerce de la Seine. Audiences des 5, 15 avril et 3 mai, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 12 (1837), 675–676; Affaire de le Sociéte de Montes- son, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 12 1837, 711; Paris, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 12 (1837), 747. 49 Original patent 4 February 1833 with additions 8 April, 27 September and 23 December 1833, as well as 26 March and 4 June 1834 and 14 July 1835. Laurent Cunin-Gredaine, Catalogue des brevets dʼinvention, dʼimportation et de perfectionnement délivrés du 1er Janvier 1828 au 31 De- cembre 1842, Mme V Bouchard-Huzard, 1843, 193. 266 Dirk HR Spennemann to market his invention.50 Possibly through the services of Hector Ledru, Brame came into contact with Hectorʼs brother, the lawyer Charles Ledru. Once patented, Chevalier set up the Société Narcisse Brame Chevalier et Cie to manufacture such machinery.51 Intriguingly, the registered company offices were located at rue Vingt-neuf juillet no. 6, the place where Charles Ledru lived. In the court case it was alleged that Charles Ledru had become a secret business partner of Chevalierʼs in contravention of the rule that lawyers were not allowed to engage in industrial businesses.52 In mid-1835 Chevalier, helped by a wide range of investors, established the Société Agricole et Industrielle de Montesson.53 Although not explicitly mentioned, we can assume that both Charles and Hector Ledru would each have been one of the many shareholders.54 In the court case it was commented that Hector Ledru had been in almost daily contact with Chevalier from June 1833 onwards and that he had provided managerial advice on the application of the invention in practical, factory-operational terms.55 Hector Ledru appears to have moved to Montesson in late 1834 to supervise the set up and the operation of a new sugar refinery.56 Moreover, Ledru seems to have seen potential for the establishment of a sugar production in the south of France and appears in vain to have solicited Brame to co-invest.57

50 Hector Ledru seems to have advised Brame on taking out foreign patents. 51 Lehon, Affaire de le Sociéte de Montesson, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 9 (1834), 948. 52 See Adolphe de Bouclon, Tableau dramatique de la justice au XIXe siècle, résumé dans la vie judiciaire d'un seul avocat (Charles Ledru), et dans la révélation des mystères de lʼaffaire Contra- fatto, pour faire suite à «Ferrand et Mariette», Vol. 2., Paris 1847, 191. 53 The company had a capital of 2.4 mn Francs. 54 Another of the many shareholders was M. Dathis, with whom Ledru was in the sawmilling business Tribunal de Commerce (cf. n. 48), 671. 55 Ibid. 56 Ibid., 668. 57 In the court case relating to the Société Agricole et Industrielle de Montesson it was noted that Hector Ledru had approached Brame Chevalier to invest in equal partnership on possible sugar production ventures in near Marseille (Ibid., 671). In the event, according to the deposition by Charles Ledru, Hector interested producers in the Provence in the invention and negotiated agreements, only to be deceived by Brame who reaped all benefits. Bourgeois Aspirations 267

Figure 1: A surviving share certificate of the Société Agricole et Industrielle de Montesson. Source: Numistoria, Sté Agricole & Industrielle de Montesson Share of 2,000F – Paris 1835, https://numistoria.com/en/yvelines-78/2920-ste-agricole-industrielle-de-montesson.html, 2015 [last access 31 January 2017].

When the Société Montesson went bankrupt in July 183658 recriminations began, especially as Brame seems to have been able to extract large amounts of funds before the companyʼs collapse and otherwise acted dishonourably. The manager and creditors of Société Montesson obviously sued Brame.59 Another suit was

58 Connaissement à ordre. Défaut dʼinondation de valeur fournie. Commissionnaire. Privilège, in: Nouvelles Archives du Commerce et de Lʼindustrie Agricole et Manufacturière 31 (1843), 336–339; Nº 3 Annulation, sur la demande du sieur Muller, dʼun Arrêt rendu, le 11 avril 1838, par la Cour royale de Douai, au profit des sieurs Tissot et Prévost, in: Bulletin Des Arrets de la Cour de Cassa- tion. Rendus en Matière Civile 40 (1844), 89–94; Désiré Dalloz/Armand Dalloz, Répertoire mé- thodique et alphabétique de législation, de doctrine et de jurisprudence en matière de droit civil, commercial, criminel, administratif, de droit des gens et de droit public: jurisprudence générale, Bureau de la jurisprudence générale, 1849, 579f., note 3. 59 Brameʼs lawyer was Claude Ledru-Rollin (no relation to Charles Ledru), later a famous poli- tician. 268 Dirk HR Spennemann brought against Charles Ledru and the notary François-Joseph Lehon for collu- sion and professional malfeasance.60 That suit was unsuccessful.61 The court case was a widely observed event, not the least due to the fact that the case was so extensively reported in the Gazette des Tribunaux,62 a paper that had been founded by Charles Ledru. While the case did not damage Charlesʼ in- tegrity and reputation as a lawyer, the publicity must have affected Hector Le- druʼs standing in the sugar producing community; after all, the public parading of private correspondence between Hector Ledru and his brother, as well as with Brame Chevalier, shed light on behind the scenes machinations. Moreover, Hec- tor Ledru had to publicly admit that he had been misled by Chevalier, a fact that would have damaged Hectorʼs reputation as a judicious investor. This was com- pounded by the public admission that the Ledru family had lost a combined 400,000 Francs in the venture.63 Indeed, if we combine this with his gullibility in investing in Hainsselinʼs perpetuum mobile (see below), we may well doubt Hector Ledruʼs business acumen.

Transitions

The 1837 entry in Bottinʼs almanac and address book neatly summarises Ledruʼs business interests at the start of his presence in Paris. At that time he resided with his brother and, presumably, had not yet acquired a manufacturing facility. Completed in late 1836, and presumably heavily based on how Ledru wished the information to appear, the address book entry reads:64

«Ledru (Hector) operates throughout France a patented system of machines for manufacturing barrels; organizes mechanical sawmills and other machines for working wood; owns several such plants in Lille, Marseille, etc.; builds steam engines with all the mechanics, mainly machinery for the manufacture of sugar indigéne, and sugar from sugar 65 beet, [resident at] rue du Vingt-neuf juillet nº 6».

60 For unrelated matters on Lehon see [Huet], Mémoire pour M. Lehon, ancien notaire à Paris, Imprimerie de Crapelet, 1843 and Jacques Langlais, Plaidoyer pour M. Lehon, ancien notaire, Paris 1842. 61 With costs awarded against the plaintiffs. 62 Much of which was also reprinted in Bouclon, Tableau dramatique (cf. n. 52). 63 Tribunal de Commerce (cf. n. 48). 64 Sébastien Bottin, Almanach-Bottin du commerce de Paris, des départemens de la France et des principales villes du monde, Paris 1837, 199. 65 Ibid. Bourgeois Aspirations 269

The entry demonstrates that during the early 1830ʼs Ledru had gradually abandoned his sugar production interests and morphed into manufacturer of machinery, initially for sugar production, and later for associated industries, such as mechanised saw mills. Given the paucity of data, much is left to conjecture as to why Ledru moved from sugar production into other areas of manufacture. At the time, the sugar beet production was restricted to northern France and had only limited expansion options in the wider region. In addition, with the end of the Napoleonic blockade and import restrictions, the French market was once again open to cheap importation of sugar from British, but also from French colonies in the Caribbean and Central America. Moreover, competition had emerged and the local sugar beet industry had reached capacity. In short, there was only so much money to be made with sugar. On the other hand, the technological support industries in the form of sugar manufacturing machinery and allied technologies, as well as in the area of barrel making and other cooperage, allowed for expansion that was un- fettered by geographic limitations. The logical move was to develop a manufacturing base that allowed him to draw on existing business contacts and general goodwill in the region, but also to expand beyond. Consequently, Hector Ledru is listed as négociant in Lille in 1836.66

Marseilles

Sometime in 1834 Ledru must have decided to expand his business interests in the south of France, for in February 1835 we find him also residing at rue de Paradis no. 125 (or 135) in Marseille. There he seems to be acting on behalf of Delamarche de Manneville to manage de Mannevilleʼs rights to Jacques-Nicolas Legendreʼs patent for the machine-driven manufacture of barrels, drums and similar vessels, as well as pieces of wooden flooring. In a number of advertisements in Orleans67 as well as Lyon,68 Ledru can be seen canvassing potential investors to take up the production rights especially in Burgundy and in the south. We do not know how successful that venture was.

66 Louis Philippe, Nº 6,333, Ordonnance du Roi proclamation des Brevets dʼinvention délivrés pendent le premier trimestre de 1836, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France 12 (1836), 322–336, here 335, no. 14. 67 Tonnaux et parquets, in: Fabrication à la mécanique. Journal de Loiret (Orleans), 15 (1835), 3. 68 Ibid., 4. 270 Dirk HR Spennemann

It seems that in early 1836 Ledru went into the cask making business himself, again drawing on his business contacts, and presumably his name and general reputation in northern France. On 1 March 1836 Ledru and the merchant dʼAthis, formed the firm Hector Ledru et Cie, based in Lille. The company acquired (from Delamarche de Manneville) the rights to the manufacture of barrels, drums and similar vessels, but was geographically limited to the departments Aisne, Pas de Calais and Nord.69 On 3 July 1837 Ledru and dʼAthis on-sold these rights to Fré- deric Kuhlmann, a merchant in Lille.70 It is likely that at or about this time the business partnership between Ledru and dʼAthis was restructured, with Ledru reducing his presence. Address books show, however, that the company Dathis and Ledru continued to operate steam driven sawmills for the manufacture of barrels and flooring in Haubourdin near Lille between 1837 and 1842.71 A second sawmill and factory, operating between 1841 and 1847, was located in Crèpy.72 Yet another steam driven sawmill was located in Lille itself, solely owned by Ledru from at least 1839 to 1847.73 Despite his ongoing investment in the saw milling industry in northern France, presumably augmented by some form of income from sugar refining (until at least 1835),74 Ledru appears to have maintained a presence in Marseille. There he seems to have chased, without a specific focus, economic opportunities as they developed and came to his attention. A good example of this is his partnership with Pierre-Nicolas Hainsselin.75 The latter had invented a machine which he called the Moteur Chimico-Physique and which was described as being «not dangerous, producing no or very little smoke, which can be applied to

69 Louis Philippe, Nº 6,333, Ordonnance du Roi proclamation des Brevets dʼinvention délivrés pendent le premier trimestre de 1836 (cf. n. 69). 70 Louis Philippe, Nº 8,010, Ordonnance du Roi proclamation des Brevets dʼinvention délivrés pendent le quatriéme trimestre de 1838, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France 18 (1839), 497–541, here 538, no. 10. 71 The 1837 business directory lists the sawmill as being owned by Datis [sic] & Ledru. Bottin, Almanach-Bottin (cf. n. 64), 704. 72 The 1841 business directory lists a sawmill at Crépy, owned by Dathis & Ledru Charles Lamy, Annuaire général du commerce, de lʼindustrie, de la magistrature et de lʼadministration: ou almanach des 500.000 adresses de Paris, des départements et des pays étrangers, Paris 1841. 73 The 1839 business directory lists a sawmill owned by Ledru in Lille proper. A. Cambon, Al- manach général des commerçans de Paris et des départemens: contenant plus de 100,000 adresses vérifiées à domicile, Bureau de almanach des commerçans, 1839, 1,018. 74 A November 1835 item comments on the French sugar beet industry and lauds Ledru et Cie at Roya (Roye) as being the most productive. Frankreich. Manchfaltiges (cf. n. 44). 75 Pierre-Nicolas Hainsselin (also spelled Hainsselain) had been inventing a number of machines and other large scale equipment. Bourgeois Aspirations 271 anything, and designed to replace the steam with advantage and economy».76 On 24 February 1835 Hainsselin and Ledru entered into a partnership to exploit Hainsselinʼs patent77 of the moteur chimico-physique. The resulting Société H Ledru, Hainsselin & Cie was to have a life time of twenty years.78 Hainsselin brought the patent into the partnership,79 while Ledru brought in 10,000 Francs, of which 4,500 Francs were a direct payment to Hainsselin and 5,500 Francs were destined for the company operations budget. Ledru was to become the sole manager of the company.80 Alas, the invention, which promised to provide cheap and safe power to the people, and a handsome income to Ledru, was a total failure. Like the 1833 ver- sion of Hainsselinʼs machine, it was, in essence, a perpetuum mobile: «[a] machine, the nature of which depends on the descent of an endless series of re- servoirs filled with water, which water is raised to suitable elevation for the pur- pose, principally by the action of the machine itself».81 Although patented both in France and abroad82 it was, of course, unworkable.83 Technically impossible, it never saw the light of day, let alone production. In essence, Ledru fell victim to his own greed. This enterprise was so far outside the norm of his previous activities and experiences that he could not judge its practicability. A payment of 10,000 Francs was quite a sizeable invest-

76 Louis Philippe, Nº 5,948, Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des brevets dʼinvention deliverés pendent le deuxiéme trimestre de 1835, in: Bulletin des lois du Royaume de France 10 (1835), 170–190, here 190, no. 12. 77 Hainsselinʼs patent of 10 July 1834. Louis Philippe, Nº 5,540, Ordonnance du Roi portant annulation des Brevets d'invention délivrés pendent le troisiéme trimestre de 1834, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France 8 (1834), 241–257, here 241, no 2. 78 Bouard, Sociétés Commerciales, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 10 (1835), 444. 79 The patent was transferred on 30 May 1835. Louis Philippe, Nº 5,948, Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des brevets d'invention deliverés pendent le deuxiéme trimestre de 1835, (cf. n. 76). 80 Bouard, Sociétés Commerciales (cf. n. 78). 81 Pierre Nicolas Hainsselin, Specification of the Patent granted to Pierre Nicolas Hainsselin, of Duke Street, St. James's, in the County of Middlesex, Architect and Surveyor, for a Machine or Motive Power for giving motionto Machinery of different descriptions, to be called «Hainsselins Motive Power». Dated 26 July 1832, in: Repertory of patent inventions and other discoveries and improvements in arts, manufactures and agriculture 15 (1833), 134–141, 134. 82 Belgium: Roi Leopold, Premiers Actes du Nouveau Gouvernement de la Belgique. Brevets dʼin- vention, in: Bulletin officiel des lois et arrêtês royeaux de la Belgique 8 (1833), 756, no. 1480; England: Hainsselin, Specification of the Patent (cf. n. 81); France: Louis Philippe, Nº 5,540, Ordonnance du Roi portant annulation des Brevets d'invention délivrés pendent le troisiéme trimestre de 1834 (cf. n. 77), 241, no. 2. 83 It is one of the perpetuum mobile concepts discussed by Henry Dircks, Perpetuum mobile; or, Search for self-motive power, London 1861, 438. 272 Dirk HR Spennemann ment. We can only surmise to what extent Ledru could recover some of his investment.84 Ledru may have been able to retain most of the 5,500 Francs to be spent on the companyʼs operations, but would have lost 4,500 Francs. To put this into context, at the time, the price of a one-kilogram loaf of bread was 35 Centimes and the cost of two litres of red wine fluctuated between 28 and 36 Centimes;85 the average annual income of a worker was 500 to 720 Francs depending on the department.86

Figure 2: Hainsselinʼs Moteur Chimico-Physique of 1833. Source: Hainsselin, Specification of the Patent (cf. n. 81).

84 A search in the Gazette des Tribunaux failed to find any reference to the dissolution of the company. 85 Based on data by Frédéric Michaud, Monthly prices in Angoulême, 1819–1880 [Mercuriales d'Angoulême], 2006, www.iisg.nl/hpw/angouleme.php [last access 14 July 2017]. 86 The average daily salaries in 1844 ranged from 1.60 Francs (in Allier) to 2.30 Francs (in the Loire) Hardach, Der soziale Status des Arbeiters (cf. n. 1), 117, which translates to an annual salary of about 500 to 720 Francs. Thus a sum of 10,000 Francs equates to 13.9 to 20 years of an average salary depending on the department. Bourgeois Aspirations 273

It seems, however, that in the bigger scheme of things not all was lost and that Ledru may have gained some technological insights from the failed invention, for on 18 August 1835, together with François Saget, he registered a patent for a portable hydraulic machine for the lifting of water to various heights and other applications.87 Over a year later, on 23 December 1836, he filed for another patent for a hydraulic machine, this time on his own, and in his capacity as a ‹négociant à Marseille.›88 Following the Hainsselin fiasco, Ledru seems to have refocussed his priorities. In 1836 Claude David89 had invented a machine to manufacture casks and barrels.90 He licensed both Ledru and the engineer Marie Claude Phi- lippe to manufacture and distribute these machines, but also sold drums and barrels himself.91 As this was an extension of his existing business line, Ledru became interested in the invention. A Société Hector Ledru et David was formed on 9 December 183692 to be amended on 18 February 1837 as Société Hector Ledru, David et Cie,93 created in order to exploit Claude Davidʼs patent (of 28 September 1836) for the manufacture of casks. On 18 February all rights to Davidʼs patent were transferred to the company, with some geographic exceptions.94 In September 184095 a new company was formed in Paris, which formally merged Delamarche de Mannevilleʼs business interests with those of Ledru, David et Cie, and a Francois Lemaître.96

87 Louis Philippe, Nº 6,070, Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des brevets d'invention deliverés pendent le troisieeme trimestre de 1835, in: Bulletin des lois du Royaume de France 10 (1835), 434–453, here 442, no.71. 88 Louis Philippe, Nº 6,179, Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des Brevets d'invention délivrés pendent le quatrième trimestre de 1835, in: Bulletin des lois du Royaume de France 12 (1836), 221–285, here 256, no. 97. 89 Honourable mention Paris exhibition 1823 and 1827, bronze medal 1834 entry in Bottin, Al- manach-Bottin (cf. n. 64), 197. 90 Patent of 28 September 1838 Louis Philippe, Nº 11,564–Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des Cessions des Brevets d'invention, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France 27 (1844), 621–639, here 624f., no. 20. 91 Bottin, Almanach-Bottin (cf. n. 64), 197. 92 Société Hector Ledru et David, with a capital of Francs 8,000 and Hector Ledru as sole manager for run time of 20 years, effective 14 April 1836. Bouard, Sociétés Commerciales (cf. n. 78). 93 With the joint managers being Claude David, mécanicien, boulevard Beaumarchais no. 4; Hector Ledru, négociant, rue du 29 Juillet no. 6; Marie-Claude-Eugéne Philippe, mécanicien, rue Château-Landon no. 17 et 19. Louis Philippe, Nº 11, 564 (cf. n. 90). 94 David was to retain exclusive trading rights in Paris and its neighbourhood (to a radius of 80 kilometer), while Ledru retained trading exclusive in the departments Nord, Pas de Calais, and Aisne as well as Indre et Loire. Ibid., 621. 95 With dates of 4, 8 and 12 September 1840. Sociétés Commerciales, Gazette des Tribunaux 17 (1842), 1,424. 96 Francois Georges Alphonse Lemaître, propriétaire, rue de Colysée no. 5, Paris. 274 Dirk HR Spennemann

That company seems to have operated with some success, but was wound up on 20 October 1842.97 As part of the restructure, two new companies were formed. On 23 November 1842 (amended on 5 December), Ledru, David et Cie granted the rights to Davidʼs patents to Delamarche de Manneville, with the exception of certain northern departments.98 On the same day, a new company was formed in Paris, which merged Delamarche de Mannevilleʼs business interests with those of Ledru, David et Cie, and Francois Lemaître. The company, which also registered on 26 April 1843 in Calvados, was set to exploit Davidʼs patent in Paris and the northern departments not covered in the previous sale.99

Paris

One of the unanswered questions of this period relates to the nature of Ledruʼs continued shareholdings in the sugar industry. While he was no longer the lead partner and manager, Ledru would have retained some stake in the business(es) to ensure an income stream. At one point in time he is likely to have sold that stake, but we do not know when. The social divide between the metropolitan centre and regional communities was, and to a large degree still is, very pro- nounced in France. Paris was the centre of the universe, even though it had lost some of its geopolitical clout in the immediate post Napoleonic era. Being a per- son of influence in regional towns like Amiens, Lille or even Marseilles, counted for little in Paris. Having been presented to King Charles X also meant nothing after the July 1830 revolution. Even the only thing that may have counted, the silver medal that had been awarded to him in 1828 for his contribution to the sugar industry, counted for little as he focussed on areas outside the field of sugar. Thus, in effect, Ledru had to start all over. In this, however, he was of course aided by the capital at his disposal. At the same time, the Louis Philippe reign was one of emergent capitalism and social upwards mobility that this entailed. Ledru was well placed to take advantage of that. Some time in late 1834 or early 1835 Ledru is on record as having moved to Paris, taking up residence at rue du Vingt-neuf juillet no. 6 in the Ier arrondissement, which, given its closeness to the Tulieries was quite an ‘upmarketʼ area. He

97 Bouard, Sociétés Commerciales (cf. n. 78). 98 Excluded were the departments of Indre de Loire, Maine et Loire, Nord, Pas de Calais, Aisne and Loire inférieure, Oise, Seine, Seine et Oise, and Seine et Marne. Louis Philippe, Nº 11, 564 (cf. n. 90), 624f., no. 21. 99 A radius of 80 kilometres around Paris was specified. The departments were Indre de Loire, Maine et Loire, Nord, Pas de Calais, Aisne and Loire inférieure. Ibid., 624, no. 20. Bourgeois Aspirations 275 may have rented an apartment of his own, or he may have moved in with his brother Charles, who was a lawyer admitted to the royal court.100

Private Life

Some time in 1836, or before, Hector Ledru became married to Adèle Constance de Vinoy, of rue Trois Bornes 15. It proved to be very difficult to illuminate the background of Adéle de Vinoy. While the name is not that common, not much could be found that extends beyond information on Adéle herself and her business Vinoy et Cie. She, and the business associated with that name, only appears in the public record from 1843 until December 1844 (see below). Their daughter Adèle Sophie was born in Paris in June 1837. Given the paucity of genealogical data, we do not know whether the Ledrus had any other children.101 The various appellations given in the directories, as well as legal documents,102 allow us to trace how Hector Ledruʼs standing in Paris changed over time. In 1839 he is described as a barrel maker (tonnelier),103 but soon after la- belled a négociant in 1841,104 a mécanicien in 1843,105 inventor in 1844,106 and finally, from July 1844 onwards, as a civil engineer.107

100 Reputedly, Charles Ledru «occupied the first floor of a magnificent apartment» building. Bouclon, Tableau dramatique (cf. n. 52), 230f. Charles Ledru, resident at rue du 29 Julliet nº 6 was a lawyer. 101 Apparently Adèle Sophie was the only daughter according to an entry in L. de Magny, No- biliaire Universel de France. Recueil Général des Généalogies Historiques des Maisons Nobles de lʼEurope, Archives de la Noblesse, 1868, 10, but that does not preclude the existence of sons. On the other hand, the fact that Ledruʼs heating business went to his son-in-law Albert Achille Louis de Bournonville, and was disbanded after the latterʼs death suggests that the Ledrus had no (surviving) male offspring. 102 As extracted in the Gazette de Tribunaux. 103 Lamy, Annuaire général du commerce, 1841 (cf. n. 72), 530. 104 Louis Philippe, Nº 9,385,Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des Brevets dʼinvention délivrés pendent le premier trimestre de 1841, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France 22 (1841), 850–881, 857, no. 63. 105 Cambon, Almanach général des commerçans de Paris 1840 (cf. n. 73), 266. 106 Baron Thénard, Rapport de Jury Central. Exposition de produits de l'industrie Française en 1844, Vol. 2 and 2, Paris 1844, 963. 107 See Extrait des procès verbaux des séances du conseil d'administration de la Société dʼEn- couragement. Séance du 24 juillet 1844, in: Bulletin de la Société d'Encouragement pour l'Indust- rie Nationale 43 (1844), 406–408; List of English Patents from February 27 to March 25, 1851, in: London Journal of Arts and Sciences and Repertory of Patent Inventions, Enl. Ser. 17 (1851), 252– 256. 276 Dirk HR Spennemann

Based on the perusal of a broad array of sources we can compile a chronology of residences and factories associated with Hector and Adéle Ledru (Table 1).

Table 1: Paris locations associated with Hector and Adéle Ledru

Address Period on record Function Sources rue des Trois Bornes nº 14 1839–1843 residence and factory rue des Trois Bornes nº 15 1844–May 1845 residence and factory rue dʼAngouleme–du–Temple nº 40 31 Jan 1841–1844 factory rue dʼAngouleme–du–Temple nº 42 May 1845–Jul 1850 factory rue dʼAngouleme–du–Temple nº 46 1839 factory rue dʼAngouleme–du–Temple nº 46 Sep 1851 factory boulevard du Temple nº 46 1841 boulevard Poissonniére nº 18 1841–1842 main depot, H Ledru et Cie Faubourg-Poissonniére 28, 1844–1851 residence rue Basse nº 41, Passy 1854 passage de Grenelle-Saint-Germain 1863 residence nº 11 rue du Champ de Mars nº 3 1864 residence rue Hauteville 64 July 1857–Apr 1858 factory

Sources: Lamy, Annuaire 1839, 1841 (cf. n. 72), 530, 646; Cambon, Almanach 1843 (cf. n. 73), 184, 266; Thénard, Rapport de Jury Central (cf. n. 106), 963; Louis Philippe, Nº 9,385–Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des Brevets d'invention délivrés pendent le premier trimestre de 1841, p. 857 no. 63; Bottin, Almanach (cf. n. 108), CCXL, 220, 456, 588; (Adéle Ledru) Louis Philippe, No. 11,958–Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des Cessions des Brevets d'invention, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France 30 (1845), 474–483, 479f., no. 34; Hector Ledru, Louis Cheret, and Cie, Tuyeaux étirés a froid galvanisés, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 20 (1845), 4; Louis Buffet, Rapport de Jury Central sur les produits de lʼagriculture et de l'industrie exposés en 1849 Imprimerie Nationale, 1850, 418; République Française, No. 3,214 (cf. n. 179); Roquebert, So- ciétés Commerciales, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 22 (1847), 804; (Adéle) Napoleon III, No. 812 Decret qui proclame 390 brevets d'invention et certificats d'addition du 1er Decembre 1852, in: Bulletin des Lois de l'Empire Français 12 (1853), 565–618, 616 no. 523; Listed as civil engineer, rue Faubourg-Poisonniere 28 in July 1844. Henrichs, Annuaire Gènéral du Commerce 1847 (cf. n. 142), 177; Today rue Raynouard. (Adéle) Napoleon III, No. 2,297 (cf. n. 109), 62 no. 150; (Adéle) Napoleon III, No. 11,994 (cf. n. 112); Napoleon III, No. 14,172 (cf. n. 113); Sebert, Societés, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 32 (1857), 710; G. Rey, Societés, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 33 (1858), 392. Bourgeois Aspirations 277

By 1844 Hector and Adéle Ledru had moved to rue Faubourg-Poisonniere 28, where he is on record until at least 1851. Judging from the address books and other references, there is no evidence that Ledru resided in Paris in 1854 to 1856,108 but we find them (at least Adéle) again mid 1854 living at rue Basse 41, Passy,109 and again in July 1857, residing at rue Hauteville 64.110 From other evidence it appears that the Ledruʼs seem to have lived, at least for part of the year, in Geneva.111 By 1862 the Ledruʼs resided at the passage de Grenelle-Saint-Germain 11,112 and finally, in 1864, at the more upmarket address of rue du Champ de Mars 3 in the first arrondissement.113

The Societé pour la Galvanisation du Fer

In late 1836 the French watchmaker and inventor Stanislas Sorel (1803 to 1871) developed a commercially viable process to protect iron from corrosion using the galvanic differential between the zinc and iron. Sorel developed five different techniques,114 of which hot galvanising and cold galvanising (by way of paint) were the most significant.115 While we know that in late 1837 both Stanislas Sorel and Hector Ledru resided at the same address, rue du 29 Juillet 6,116 their relationship seems to predate this. It is not clear how Stanislas Sorel and Hector

108 He is not listed in Sébastien Bottin, Almanach-Bottin du commerce de Paris, des départe- mens de la France et des principales villes du monde, Paris 1855. 109 Today rue Raynouard. Napoleon III, 2,297, Decret imperial qui proclame 991 brevets dʼinven- tion et certificats dʼaddition du 29 juin 1854, in: Bulletin des Lois de lʼEmpire Français (257) 1854, 49–142, here 62. 110 See Sebert, Societés, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 32 (1857). 111 Marriage of their daughter occurred in January 1857 in Geneva André-François-Joseph Borel dʼHauterive, Annuaire de la noblesse de France et des maisons souveraines de lʼEurope, Bureau de la Publication, 1867, 266. 112 Napoleon III, No. 11,994, Decret Imperial qui proclame 1483 Brevets dʼinvention at certifcats dʼaddition, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France 18 (1864), 137–248, 139f., no. 34. 113 Napoleon III, No. 14,172, Decret Imperial qui proclame des Brevets dʼinvention et Certficats dʼaddition, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France 28 (1866), 489–586, 568 no. 1076. 114 Anselme Payen, Rapport au nome de Comité des arts chimiques, sur un nouveau procédé de conservation de fer, inventé par M Sorel, rue des Trois Bornes, no. 14, faubourg du Temple [ap- prouvé de de séance 28 fevrier 1838], in: Bulletin de la Société dʼEncouragement pour lʼIndustrie Nationale, 37 1838, 123–126; Stanislas Sorel, Description dʼun procédé pour préserver de lʼoxida- tion toutes espèces dʼobject de fer et dʼacier, in: Bulletin de la Société dʼEncouragement pour lʼIndustrie Nationale 37 (1838), 398–401. 115 Spennemann, Galvanic Bubble (cf. n. 8); idem., Stanislas Sorel (cf. n. 8); idem., Stanislas Sorelʼs zinc-based paints, in: APT Bulletin [in print]. 116 Stanislas Sorel and Hector Ledru resident at rue du 29 Juillet 6. 278 Dirk HR Spennemann

Ledru met, but both seem to have had some connection with the French sugar beet industry. Ledruʼs connection has already been mentioned above. In January 1835 Sorel had entered into a partnership with Adrien Jean Pierre Thilorier and Bernard Serrurot117 exploiting a sugar extraction patent118 and in subsequent years seems to have researched aspects of sugar extraction. In addition, both Ledru and Sorel came from the north of France. Given that Ledru had no prior experience in metal manufacture, let alone metallurgy, one wonders why he is listed on the patent. It is unlikely that he had any intellectual input in the invention. Indeed, a year after the patent was registered, Sorel was recognised by the Société dʼEncouragement pour lʼIndustrie Nationale with a silver medal,119 but no mention is made of Ledru. In the absence of any archival data one has to speculate. But it appears reasonable to assume that Ledru financed some or all of Sorelʼs work and thus had his investment secured by being named co-owner of the patent. In early September 1837 Sorel and Ledru, aided with additional funds provided by Isidore Catheux120 formed the Societé pour la Galvanisation du Fer with an initial capital of 100,000 Francs.121 On 9 January 1838 the company decided to raise its capital to two million Francs through a public share offering, issuing 2,000 shares of 500 Francs to the public and 2,000 non-voting shares to the three primary shareholders. When formally listed on the Bourse de Paris on 19 March,

117 Adrien Jean Pierre Thilorier, of place Vendôme 21, was a French inventor with a number of patents to his name. 118 That partnership between Sorel, Adrien Jean Pierre Thilorier and Bernard Serrurot had been formed on 27 January 1835 to exploit a number of patents related to a thermostatic syphon, which had commercial application in the production of sugar from beets Stanislas Sorel, Adrien Jean Pierre Thilorier, and Bernard Serrurot, no. 5096, Brevet dʼinvention de cinq ans en date du 11 janvier 1837 pour le chauffage des liquides par circulation, in: Description des machines et procé- dés spécifiés consignes dans les brevets dʼinvention, de perferctionnemnet et dʼimportation 46 (1842), 71–74; Jean Claude Eugène Péclet, Rapport fait par M Péclet au nom de Comité des arts économiques, sur le siphon thermostatique de M Sorel, rue de Bouloy no. 4, Paris [approuvé de séance 31 juillet 1836], in: Bulletin de la Société dʼEncouragement pour lʼIndustrie Nationale 35 (1836), 409–410; Stanislas Sorel, Description du siphon thermostatique pour le chauffage des liquides par lʼcirculation, et du fourneau-chaudiére employé à cet usage, in: Bulletin de la Société dʼEncouragement pour lʼIndustrie Nationale 35 (1836), 410–411. 119 Payen, Rapport au nome (cf. n. 114). 120 Jacques Philippe Isidore Catheux (*30 Apr 1798,∞ 19 April 1836 to Françoise Meunier, † 14 Oct 1867), a business owner, resident at rue du Temple no. 102, Paris. Charles Camus, Sociétés Commerciales, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 12 (1837), 1064. 121 The company, issued as 200 shares of 500 Francs was formed with a run time of 20 years. Societés Commerciales; Charles-Malo, Chronique Industrielle et Commerciale, in: La France In- dustrielle, Manufacturière, Agricole et Commerciale 4 (1837), 199–200. Bourgeois Aspirations 279 the stock opened at 3,000 Francs, six times the face value of the shares.122 The extreme speculation was widely reported in France and other countries, such as Germany.123 The wild fluctuations of the market were influenced, if not caused, by active manipulations of the share price and gullible investors. Notallinvestorscanbeviewedaslargelycluelessrapaciousspeculatorsthough. Once Sorel, Ledru and Catheux had agreed that they would not use their share par- cels to vote in the annual general meetings, John Cockerill, one of the leading Eur- opean industrialists of the time, took up a parcel of 500 of the 2,000 non-voting shares on offer.124 Despite Cockerillʼs stature as an industrialist and investor125 and despite the patent being taken up overseas, the share price continued to slide. In June 1838a business reporter of the journal La France Industrielle, Manu- facturière, Agricole et Commerciale took up the issue of the apparent failure of the Societé pour la Galvanisation du Fer.126 The writer noted that a broad range of applications had been touted, which had set up an expectation among the spec- ulators and small-time investors that galvanisation was the wonder cure for all technological ills.127 The failure of the Societé pour la Galvanisation du Fer to gain traction seems to have been squarely sheeted home to the board of directors. Instead of rapidly developing and building the factory to produce marketable products, the company spent all its energy on publicity, the generation of what amounts to pure hype, testimonials to the quality of the process and newspaper pieces that extolled the range of applications.128 Consequently, the investors became disillusioned and abandoned the stock.

122 Share offering see Honore Cahouet, Societés Commerciales, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 12 (1838), 312; Charles Pellet, Societé en Commandite pour la Galvanisation du Fer, in: La France Industrielle, Manufacturière, Agricole et Commerciale (Paris) (15 March 1838), 402–404. 123 Handels- und Börsennachrichten, in: Allgemeine Zeitung (Augsburg) (26 April 1838); Neueste Nachrichten, in: Frankfurter Ober-Postamts-Zeitung (17 March 1838); Consommé, politsches und nicht-politisches, in: Bayerʼsche Landbötin (5 April 1838); Gewerbs-Producten-Niederlagen und Lagerhausbanken auf Actien, in: Allgemeine Polytechnische und Handlungs-Zeitung (26 April 1838); Spekulationsgeist, in: Morgenblatt für gebildete Leser (21 May 1838). 124 Pellet, Societé en Commandite (cf. n. 122). 125 Natalis Briavoinne, De lʼindustrie en Belgique: causes de décadence et de prospérité: sa situa- tion actuelle, Brussels 1839, 296ff. 126 There is a small booklet published in 1838 which has the value of the shares of the Societé pour la Galvanisation du Fer as its focus: Galvanisation du fer. Du mérite de cette industrie et de la valeur des actions, Paris; Galvanisation du fer. Du mérite de cette industrie et de la valeur des actions, Paris 1838. 127 Galvanisation, in: La France Industrielle, Manufacturière, Agricole et Commerciale 5 (1838), 1–2; Urteile einiger englischer Chemiker über die Galvanisierung des Eisens, in: Guttenberg. Zeit- schrift für und über Österreichʼs Industrie und Handel 1 (1838), 294–295. 128 An Austrian extract for the same item was even more strident in it formulations (ibid.). 280 Dirk HR Spennemann

Given the prospects of the invention and given the meteoric rise of the shares during the first few days, it is not surprising that Sorel et Cie soon encountered competition, not only in France, but also abroad, such as in England, Germany and Belgium. By late 1839 it had become obvious that the current management structure, with the diverging objectives, was no longer workable. Thus, at its annual general meeting on 26 December 1839, the shareholders of the Société pour la Galvanisation du Fer unanimously supported the motion that both Sorel and Catheux were to step down as managers, and that the sole management of the company was to be carried out by Hector Ledru. To reflect that change, it was further agreed that henceforth the company be called Hector Ledru et Cie.129 Ledru managed the company competently, but not brilliantly. For unknown reasons Hector Ledru stepped down as managing director of Hector Ledru et Cie on 6 March 1844 and appointed Claude Rabatel, rue des Trois Bornes nº 15, as interim manager.130 At the general meeting on 26 March 1844, Ledruʼs resignation was accepted,131 Baron Saint Pol was appointed sole manager,132 and the name of the company formally changed to Saint-Pol et Cie.133 Even while involved in the Societé en Commandite pour la Galvanisation du Fer, Hector Ledruseemstohave founded andrunanumberofcompaniesin parallel. His interests in the manufacture of barrels and saw milling equipment (see above) continued. At thesame time, Ledru also dabbled in other inventions, some of which seem to have been opportunistic. An example of this is a patent for a «simple and novel process for dyeing wool and all wool fabrics in blue colour of a nice shade, called bleu Napoléon, and all the nuances of indigo that can be obtained, such as green-black, olive, bronze and other colours without actually using indigo». This patent was awarded on 8 May 1839 to Ledru as the lead patentee together with the cloth dyerJean Baptiste Laurent.134 The only connection between them, as far as we

129 Meeting called on 4 December 1839. Société pour la Galvanisation du Fer, in: Gazette des Tribunaux, 15 (1839), 112. 130 Appointed on 7 March, with powers until 15 April 1844. Claude Rabatel, Annonces légales [Rabatel new manager], in: Gazette des Tribunaux 19 (1844), 456. 131 Effective 6 March 1844 Saint Pôl et Cie. Societés Commerciales, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 19 (1844), 532. 132 But without accepting any personal liability for any actions and activities prior to the date of appointment (ibid.). 133 Ibid. 134 Louis Philippe, No. 7,567, Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des Cessions des Brevets dʼinvention déliverés pendant le deuxieme trimestre de 1838, 386, no. 144; Hector Ledru and Mon- sieur Laurent, 4859a 5 mai 1838 pour une procédé perfectionné de teinture bleu, noir ou vert, in: Description des machines et procédés spécifiés dans les brevets dʼinvention 44, 1841, 320–323, The patent was added to on 3 October 1838 by Laurent on his own Louis Philippe, No. 8,010, Ordonnance du Roi proclamation des Brevets dʼinvention délivrés pendent le quatriéme trimestre Bourgeois Aspirations 281 know, was that both resided at the same address, rue 29 julliet 6, then in Parisʼ arrondissement.135 The patent was annulled on 1 January 1841136 and never seems to have been exploited commercially to any noticeable degree.137

Cold-drawn pipes

During and after the separation from his galvanising business, Ledru pursued further inventions and developments primarily in the field of pipes, closely linked with Vinoy & Co. In 1843 Ledru invented the concept of manufacturing pipes from long strips of galvanised sheet iron. The seam had edges that were folded over, which could be connected by a long piece of metal acting as a clamp. Once soldered, they were water and airproof.138 Contemporary sources noted that drawn iron tubing had been invented in England, but had relied on hot metal. Cold drawn tubing, as developed in France, was seen as «in every respect perfect, indeed much more perfect than the hot-drawn tubing. »139

de 1838, 498 no. 12. It is worth noting that Laurent, although listed in October 1839 at rue Mandar no. 16 see Louis Philippe, No. 8,010, Ordonnance du Roi proclamation des Brevets dʼinvention délivrés pendent le quatriéme trimestre de 1838, 498, no. 12, he is not listed in the relevant address books. Lamy, Annuaire général du commerce, 1839 (cf. n. 72), Cambon, Almanach général des commerçans, 1840 [cf. n. 96], Cambon, Almanach général des commerçans, 1841 [cf. n. 72]; Bottin, Almanach-Bottin [cf. n. 108], 233, for all Laurent listed. A genealogical pages lists a Jean-Baptiste Laurent Geruzet (23 Sep 1768 Laon, Aisne; † 20 May 1846 Laon, Aisne) as a ‘marchand teinturierʼ M Racle, Jean-Baptiste Laurent Geruzet, http://gw.geneanet.org/racle?lang=fr&p= jean+baptiste +laurent&n=geruzet, 2015 [last access 31 January 2017]. While the dates match in principle, and his primary residence in Laon would explain why he is not listed in Paris address books, the accurate relationship cannot be proven at this stage. 135 The fact that so many co-inventors of Ledruʼs resided at the same address as his brother, which is described as a «magnificent apartment» building. Bouclon, Tableau dramatique (cf. n. 53), 230f., suggests that Charles Ledruʼs residence may have been a legal «address of convenien- ce» rather than an actual residential address for many. 136 Louis Philippe, No. 9,155 (cf. n. 134), 357, no. 92. 137 It appears that Ledruʼs financial losses in the investment may have been limited to the patent fee (Francs 1,500). 138 At the time of invention well publicised in Germany Frankreich Neue Beobachtungen bei der Gasfabrication. Verbesserung von Gasröhren, in: Magazin für die Literatur des Auslandes (1844), 623–624; Ledruʼs kalt gestrekte Röhren von Eisenblech, in: Dinglerʼs Polytechnisches Journal (1845), 73. 139 Reported with same wording in several British papers. Miscellanea. Paris Academy of Sci- ences, in: The Cheltenham Chronicle and Gloucestershire Advertiser (1845), 4; Science and Art, in: Northern Star and National Tradesʼ Journal (Leeds) (1844), 6; Scientific Notices, in: Hereford Journal (1844), 4. 282 Dirk HR Spennemann

To capitalise on the invention, the Société A de Vinoy et Cie, manufacturer of pipes, was founded in 1843,140 trading from rue de Trois Bornes 15.141 A de Vinoy et Cie exhibited their pipes in Paris at the French national industry exhibition of 1844, where they were awarded an honourable mention.142 It remains unclear why the Ledrus decided to set up Vinoy et Cie as the vehicle for manufacturing pipes. It could well be that this was an attempt at separating the pipe manufacturing business, which Ledru clearly perceived to have a future, from the galvanised iron business that had run into stagnation. The relationship between de Vinoy et Cie and Ledru et Cie was most certainly very closely interwoven both personally and spatially. The initial residence and factory had been at rue des Trois Bornes nº 14 from 1839 onwards. It was expanded with the factory erected at rue dʼAngoulême-du-Temple nº 40. The factory premises were directly opposite the residence which straddled the block between both streets. It was an ideal set up. In late 1843 Ledru established the de Vinoy pipe works. By that time they had moved to the larger residence at rue des Trois Bornes nº 14, across the road from nº 14. The pipe works were established at rue dʼAngoulême-du-Temple nº 40, next door to nº 40, which allowed for an efficient work flow. The citation for the honourable mention at the 1844 exhibition notes that while de Vinoy et Cie manufactured the pipes, «all work [was] performed under [Ledruʼs] direction and by his advice»143 The Austrian architect Paul Sprenger visited the factory in late 1844 and provided the following description:

«Mr Lambaux took out a patent […] for the manufacture of pipes for gas lighting made from single and double galvanised iron sheets (i. e. galvanised iron made according to Mr Sorelʼs process), which is carried out by Mr de Vinoy, rue des Trois Bornes nº 15. While so far none have been used in Paris, Mr Sprenger saw pipes being made in the small factory to fill an order placed by Havanne (a small town).144 The connecting pieces are soldered, and the galvanising of the two pipes which have been slotted one into the other occurs in another factory of Mssrs Ledru and C, rue dʼAngouléme du Temple nº 40. Mr Ledruʼs opinion regarding these pipes suggested that the business, even for pipes with a smaller diameter, would be profitable as their cost was less than half of that of

140 Thénard, Rapport de Jury Central (cf. n. 106) 966. 141 Listed in the 1844 directory as manufacturer of double-walled pipes for gas and water, rue des Trois Bornes 15. P. Henrichs, Annuaire Gènéral du Commerce et de lʼIndustrie ou Almanach des 500,000 Adresses, Paris 1844–1850, 492. 142 Thénard, Rapport de Jury Central (cf. n. 106), 963–966. 143 Ibid., 964. 144 The town Havanne has not been identified. It seems either a typographic error for an unknown French town, or, much less likely, the town is indeed Havana in Cuba. Bourgeois Aspirations 283

lead pipes, but when tested, they withstood a pressure of more than 40 atm without ruptur- ing.»145

Sprengerʼs comments are illuminating in two ways. They confirm the close working relationship between de Vinoy et Cie and Ledru et Cie, and they underline Hector Ledruʼs central role. It appears that Ledru and his wife set up a corporate structure, whereby the pipe manufacturing business was a separate commercial entity, in her name (see below), that served as a feeder industry to the galvanising business. While the galvanising business could provide a broad range of consumer goods, such as horse bits and stirrups, watering cans and drums,146 the major growth market lay in the area of domestic and public construction. During mid- nineteenth century France two areas spring to mind: the manufacture of galvanised corrugated iron for roofing and the production of galvanised iron pipes for water and especially for gas. The latter service was to become a major growth industry of the period as both public lighting and then businesses and private homes converted to gas.147 When considering Ledruʼs options, we also need to appreciate the inter- connectivity of the issues. While his products could serve a number of markets, new markets opened up, or became feasible specifically due to the products. Thus galvanised iron pipes could be used to pipe water and gas. The provision of gas became more feasible with the introduction of galvanised iron pipes as they were more resistant to the corrosive effects of the gas, which in turn allowed more gas to be installed. Thus to some degree, Ledruʼs galvanised iron business was at the cusp of developments, the true profits of which were reaped by successors. From a manufacturing point of view, a galvanised iron manufacturer needed to acquire pre-manufactured items for galvanisation. Thus his business was largely limited to value-adding. In the ideal world, however, the manufacturer would reap profits all along the production chain. Indeed, two or three decades later, British galvanised iron manufacturers perfected the closed production chain, starting with iron ore procured from their own mines, which was melted into bars in their iron foundries, which in turn delivered them to their own mills

145 Cited in Wilhelm Engerth, Bericht der Abtheilung für Mechanik über einige kleine Mitthei- lungen, welche Herr Hofbaurath Sprenger aus Paris eingesendet hat, in: Verhandlungen des niederösterreichischen Gewerb-Vereins (1834), 15–18, 15f. 146 See the variety of objects in the price lists Dirk Spennemann, Retail prices for galvanised iron objects sold by the ‘Societé en Commandite pour la Galvanisation du Ferʼ in 1840 and 1844, Albury 2016. 147 M. R. Boutville, Lʼeclairage public a Paris des origines a la fin du XIXe siecle in: Revue Scientifique (1933), 609–615. 284 Dirk HR Spennemann where the iron bars were cold-rolled into sheets which could be delivered to final galvanisation and subsequent corrugation.148 Ledru went some way along this line, by investing in the de Vinoy and Cie pipe works.

Figure 3: The chronological relationship of Ledruʼs companies. Note: Abbreviations: G–Guillard, Ledru et Cie; H–Hector Ledru, Hainsselin & Cie; LC&C–Hector Ledru, Cheret et Cie; LR&C–Hector Ledru, Robin et Cie; R–Robin et Cie; V–Vaudore, Ledru et Cie.

The restructure of 1844

The year 1844 seems to have become a turning point for Ledru. Then aged 46 he seems to have once again re-focussed his efforts. The Paris address book for 1844, compiled in 1843, shows that Ledru carried out a general engineering and manufacturing business, still selling apparatuses and machines for the fabrication of ‘native sugarʼ (from sugar beet), galvanised iron and steel, corrosion-protected copper, furniture made from galvanized iron, steam engines and boilers, equipment to prevent steam engine explosions, fire temperature controllers, as well as a thermostatic syphon.149 Many of these were based on inventions by Stanislas

148 E.g. Redcliffe Crown. Dirk H.R. Spennemann, Redcliffe Crown Corrugated Iron in Australasia. A survey of its history, marketing and distribution, 1875–1921, Albury 2015. 149 Henrichs, Annuaire Gènéral du Commerce, 1844 (cf. n. 142), 618. Bourgeois Aspirations 285

Sorel. By late 1846 the principal business had shifted. Ledru, Cheret and Cie primarily sold cold extruded pipes made of copper and galvanised iron sheets, for steam, water, and gas as well as suction pumps.150 The galvanising business no longer figured in the manufacturing line up and it appears that Ledru had become a customer of galvanising works, rather than a manufacturer of the product. By the end of January 1845 the production and distribution had been formally taken over by Hector Ledru et Cie. On 1 March 1845 Ledru is joined by the merchant Louis Cheret151 to form Hector Ledru, Cheret et Cie as successors to A de Vinoy et Cie.152 Ledruʼs pipes were lauded as a possibly very safe design, which would greatly aid public safety as gas explosions caused by burst pipes were not uncommon.153 Throughout 1845 Ledru et Cie advertised their products both for the domestic and the French colonial markets.154 Ledru himself gave presentations and published a number of papers on the cold drawing of pipes made from copper, sheet metal and galvanised iron.155 In 1845 and in following years, Ledru seems to have visited England, presumably to develop business contacts.156

150 Ibid., 519. 151 Louis Cheret, licensed merchant no. 1784, 1r catégorie, 4e classe, resident at rue de la Fidélité 4 Edouard Lefébure de Saint-Maur, Sociétés Commerciales, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 20 (1845), 457. By contrast, Hector Ledru was described as «ancien négociant». 152 The company had a scheduled life of 20 years with both Ledru and Cheret being managers Lefébure de Saint-Maur, Sociétés Commerciales; Hector Ledru, Tuyeaux étirés a froid galvanisés, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 20 (1845), 4. Cheret was obliged to pay Franc 40,000 into the company (as well a underwrite future funds if needed), while Ledru brought in the factory and the rights to Zambeauxʼs patents. 153 Gazette des Tribunaux (1845), 147, 3 col. B. 154 Domestic advertisements Hector Ledru, Louis Cheret, and Cie, Tuyeaux étirés a froid galva- nisés, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 20 (1845), 4; Ledru, Cheret, and Cie, Tuyeaux étirés a froid gal- vanisé. in: Gazette des Tribunaux 12 (1845), 236. 155 Hector Ledru, Mécanique appliquée–Note sur ʼetirage á froid des tuyeaux en cuivre, en tôle, etc, in: Comptes rendus hebdomadaires des séances de lʼAcadémie des sciences 19 (1844), 1,272– 1,275; Hector Ledru, Note sur le etirage à froid des tuyaux en cuivre, en tôle, etc, in: Le technolo- giste ou archives du progrès de lʼindustrie française et étrangère 6 (1845), 219–220; Extrait des procès verbaux des séances du conseil dʼadministration de la Société dʼEncouragement, in: Séance (24 juillet 1844); Iron Tubing, in: The Civil Engineer and Architectʼs Journal 8 (1845), 61. 156 On record are visits in May 1845, presumably also February 1846, June 1848 and March 1849; National Archives [UK], Public Record Office, HO 2 Home Office: Aliens Act 1836: Certificates of Arrival of Aliens, 1836–1852; Piece 138; Certificate Number 567; Series HO 3 Home Office, Aliens Act 1836, Returns and Papers; Returns of alien passengers, July 1836-December 1869; Piece 35; 39; 48; Piece 51. 286 Dirk HR Spennemann

The partnership between Ledru and Cheret was dissolved by mutual agreement on 1 June 1847.157 The company immediately transitioned into a new configuration, with the merchant Pierre Robin158 stepping in as sole manager.159 Robin and his partner brought into the new company all their previous manufacturing assets at rue Angouleme-du-Temple nº 42,160 while the Hector and Adéle Ledru brought in the patent rights for all of France.161 It is not clear whether these also included the rights to a patent for a machine to manufacture a certain type of pipes162 which Hector Ledru filed on 25 May 1846 (with additional filings until July of the same year).163 Ledru patented this invention also in England, Belgium, Austria and Ba- varia.164 In December 1846 Ledru appears to have licenced the production of the pipes to the start-up company deBaillehache, Desforges et Cie,165 butlittle is known about that company and whether it ever produced pipes.

157 Roquebert, Sociétés Commerciales, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 22 (1847), 776. 158 Pierre Robert Bernard Robin, rue Saint Nicaise 6. Roquebert, Sociétés Commerciales (cf. n. 157). 159 Negotiations on 4, 7 and 8 June 1847. The company was deemed officially established on 1 June 1847 with a projected duration of twenty years. 160 The assets were a factory at rue Angouleme-du-Temple 42 comprised of associated equipment (and machinery), the companyʼs good will, the rights to lease the premises, ownership of two factory halls erected on the leased premises as well as Franc 48,000 in cash assets Roque- bert, Sociétés Commerciales (cf. n. 157). 161 With the exception of Bouches du Rhone. Ibid. 162 The machine was designed to cold-draw the tubes, perforate the margins and then rivet the sides in one continual process Karmarsch, Geschichte der Technologie deit der Mitte des Acht- zehnten Jahrhunderts, 378. 163 Original French patent dated 25 May 1846 Louis Philippe, No. 13,243, Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des brevets dʼinvention, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France 33, 1847, 1,093–1,182, 1129 no. 424, on which he expanded on 11 June (improving connections and coatings) Louis Philippe, No. 13,243, Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des brevets dʼinven- tion, 1159 no. 764 on 16 July 1846; Louis Philippe, No. 13,243, Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des brevets dʼinvention, 1179 no. 940 and again on 14 April 1847 Louis Philippe, No. 14,242, Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des brevets dʼinvention, 9 Fevriér 1848, p. 225 no. 605. 164 Austrian patent: issued 21 February 1847 for five years; Ledru represented by Friedrich Roedi- ger, Vienna, St. Ullrich Strasse 50 Anonymous, III Privilegien u.s.w Österreich, in: Allgemeine Bau- zeitung. Ephemeriden, 2, 1847, 182–184; Bavarian patent: issued 19 March 1848 for five years. Ma- schinen zur Fabrikation von Rohren zur Luft- und Wasserleitung, Bayrisches Regierungsblatt 1848, 591, listed in S. Jandebeur, Döllingers Register über die in den Regierungs- und Gesetzesblättern von den Jahren 1847, 1848 und 1849 enthaltenen Verordnungen, George Jaquet, 1850, 134 no. 142. 165 The partners in the company agreed to set aside Francs 50,000 for each of the three countries to pay for patents and establishment of the factories Schaye, Sociétés Commerciales, in: Gazette des Tribunaux, 22 (6059), 1846, 124. We do not know how much of the Francs 150,000 was paid as royalties for the patent rights. Bourgeois Aspirations 287

By 1849 Robin et Cie, then trading as Ledru, Robin et Cie, was awarded a bronze medal for the design at the Paris industrial exhibition of 1844, despite its problems. 166 Ledruʼs design had proven to have some faults, especially at the joints, which soon led to rival patents.167

Adèle Constance de Vinoy

As discussed above, it proved very difficult to shed much light on the background of the company Vinoy & Cie. In the French sources, the company is only ever referred to as «A de Vinoy et Cie.» At the Paris exhibition of 1844 the pipes were listed as being produced by «Mr de Vinoy»168 Consequently, an Austrian technical journal indicates that the owner of de Vinoy et Cie, working from rue des Trois Bornes 15, was a male.169 Even contemporary sources seem to have been confused by the arrangements, as the citation to the honourable mention notes that

« [t]hese products were exhibited under the name of M[onsieur] de Vinoy; but it is clear from a letter addressed to the president of the jury by M[adame] A. Vinoy and Cie, that Mr. Hector Ledru invented devices that are used to manufacture these pipes, and that it [Vinoy and Cie, ed.] sponsors the establishment where they are made, and in which all work is performed under his direction and by his advice; therefore Mr. Hector Ledru personally receives, on the 170 formal request of M[adame] A. Vinoy and Co, the prize awarded by the jury».

Perusal of the patent registers shows that Adèle Constance de Vinoy registered patents with the permission of her husband, Hector Ledru.171 One might assume that this was a structure specifically designed to hold the potentially lucrative rights to patents separately from the business and thereby both ensure a revenue flow, but also safeguard the patent as a separately owned asset in case the business failed. Upon investigation, however, it becomes evident that Adèle de Vinoy is on record as an inventor and businesswoman in her own right.

166 Buffet, Rapport de Jury Central (cf. n. 139), 418f. 167 Faults noted: Buffet, Rapport de Jury Central (cf. n. 139), 418f.; rival patents e.g. John Barlow, Patent Cold-drawn Galvanized Iron Tubes [advertisement], in: Gazette des Tribunaux, 1 (15) (1850), advert page foll. p. 206. 168 Thénard, Rapport de Jury Central (cf. n. 106), 963ff. 169 Engerth, Bericht der Abtheilung für Mechanik (cf. n. 146), 15. 170 Thénard, Rapport de Jury Central (cf. n. 106), 964. 171 Louis Philippe, No. 11,865, Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des brevets dʼinvention deliverés pendent le quatrtème trimestre de 1844, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France 30 (1845), 225–263, 228, no. 30. 288 Dirk HR Spennemann

For example, on 27 July 1844 she acquired, in her own commercial capacity,172 the rights to Joseph Zambeauxʼs invention of 17 April 1843 regarding clean pipes for all uses.173 Subsequently she registered under her own name, improvements of Zambeauxʼs patent on 2 October 1844.174 On 15 April 1845 Mdme Ledru sold her rights to Joseph Zambeauxʼs patent as well as her own improvements to that patent to Hector Ledru, Cheret et Cie.175 Additional improvements of Zambeauxʼs patent were registered by Adèle Constance de Vinoy on 14 January and on 4 February 1846,176 but in these cases, Hector Ledru, Cheret et Cie also acquired some of the rights. On 6 January 1848 Adèle Constance de Vinoy registered under her name a patent for a central hot air heating system for large buildings (see below). As «Mdme de Ledru, née Vinoy (Adèle Constance) » she is also listed on 13 June 1853 as the inventor of the turbine ‘hydro-atmosphérique.ʼ177

The Heating Business

The manufacture of pipes for gas and water systems, combined with an earlier interest in heating systems for sugar works, and combined with his wifeʼs interests, gave rise to a new line of business that was to dominate the rest of their lives: central heating systems for public and private buildings. As noted above, on 6 January 1848 Adèle Constance de Vinoy registered under her name a patent for a central hot air heating system «for theatres, public buildings, hospitals and the like. » She filed additions to the patent on 10 Feb-

172 Louis Philippe, No. 11,958, Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des Cessions des Bre- vets dʼinvention, 479f., no. 34 173 «tuyaux propres à tout usages» Louis Philippe, No. 10,927, Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des Brevets dʼinvention délivrés pendent le deuxième trimestre de 1843, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France 27 (1844), 593–610, 602, no. 88 174 Louis Philippe, No. 11,865, Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des brevets dʼinvention deliverés pendent le quatrième trimestre de 1844 (cf. n. 171). 175 Exempt from this sale were the departments Doubs and Bouches-du Rhône. 176 Louis Philippe, No. 12,860, Ordonnance du Roi portant proclamation des brevets dʼinvention deliverés pendent le quatrtème trimestre de 1844, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France 30 (1846), 381–423, 420, no. 435; Louis Philippe, No. 13,000, Ordonnance du Roi proclamation des Cessions des Brevets dʼinvention, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France 33 (1847), 612–730, 716, no. 451. 177 Napoleon III, No. 2,297 (cf. n. 109). Bourgeois Aspirations 289 ruary 1848, 8 July 1850, and 25 September 1851.178 From 1849 onwards Ledru started selling Chaussenotʼs dry air heaters, an early form of central heating.179 In parallel, Ledru continued their development to maximize the fuel efficiency. He obtained a French patent,180 which was also registered in Britain and Scotland (Figure 4).181 Ledru involved himself in additional capitalist ventures if they were related to his gas and heating business. Thus on 9 July 1857 the Société du Carburateur Launay was formed in order to exploit Théodule Charles Launayʼs patent for a carburettor that improved the brightness of gas lighting.182 The commercial structure was the Société Guillard, Ledru et Cie (rue de Rivoli 164), established for twenty years with a capital of 150,000 Francs,183 and comprised of a partnership between Marie-Joseph Gulliard,184 Hector Ledru, Jules Cropin,185 Théodule Charles Launay186 and other parties. Both Guillard and Ledru were appointed

178 Original patent: République Française, No. 3,214 Decret qui proclame 783 brevets dʼinvention et certificats dʼaddition, in: Bulletin des Lois de la République Française 4 (1851), 397–474, 471, no. 748, 497 no. 229. 179 See testimonials in Hector Ledru, de Bournonville, and Cie, Société des Chauffages par les Calorifères brevetés de Hector Ledru et Chaussenot Junior S.G.D.G pour la Suisse et la France. Calorifères Chaussenot Junior Documents relatifs a son emploi, soit comme chauffage des Habi- tations, soit comme applications aux besoins Industries. 25 Mai 1860, Imprimerie Ch. Gruaz, 1860. 180 See also his explanation in Fabrication des Tuyaux Hector Ledru, Fabrication des tuyaux, in: Le Génie industriel 8 (1854), 128–134. 181 Registered in Britain on 28 March 1851 as patent no. 13,566. List of Engish Patents from February 27 to March 25, 1851, 256; Bennett Woodcroft, Subject-matter Index of Patents Applied for and Patents Granted, for the period from March 2, 1617 (14 James I) to October 1, 1851 (16 Victoria). Part I (A–M), Great Seal Patent Office, 1857, 371; 24 March 1851 as patent 12,568. Spe- cifications of English Patents enrolled during the week ending October 2, 1851, 270; in Scotland on 21 January 1853. List of Scotch Patents, in: London Journal of Arts and Sciences and Repertory of Patent Inventions, Enl. Ser. 21 (1853), 185–190. 182 The exploitation rights covered all of France with the exception of the departments Nord and Pas de Calais Sebert, Societés (cf. n. 110). 183 Hector Ledru and Marie-Joseph Gulliard contributed Francs 25,000 each, with all other partners contributing Franc 10,000 each. Jules Cropin and Théodule Charles Launay contributed the rights to Launayʼs patent (no. 28,131 of 22 October 1856) as well as two patent additions, and the good will, all contracts as well as products and financial assets of the Société Cropin et Launay. Exempt were the departments Nord and Pas de Calais for which other licensing agreements. were in place. Sebert, Societés (cf. n. 148). 184 Marie-Joseph Gulliard, Officier de Legion dʼHonneur, resident at Cité Travise no. 22. 185 Jules Cropin, manufacturer of gas appliances, resident at rue du Roule 7. 186 Théodule Charles Launay, former inspector of the Compagnie Parisienne dʼEclairage (Paris Lighting Company), resident at passage des Acacias 7, Vaugirard. 290 Dirk HR Spennemann managing director.187 The company soon represented itself to the broader public as a manufacturer of «heaters with great perfection and economic usage, suitable for apartments, shops, and factories»188 and installed demonstration devices in a number of locations.189 On 12 November 1857 Guillard was replaced as one of the principal managers by Alexandre François Vaudorè.190 While the general trading name continued, the managing company now became Vaudorè, Ledru et Cie.191 Vaudorè and Ledru sold their patent rights on 16 December 1857.192 That company in turn was liquidated on 7 April 1858.193 Intriguingly, in their entry in the 1858 address book, Guillard, Ledru et Cie claim that the carburettor manufactured by them created 50 per cent savings on gas consumption,194 while an 1858 advertisement guarantees a saving of 40 per cent. These are bold figures that, if true, would have resulted in substantial savings to their customers.

Brignais

The final chapter of Ledruʼs life takes place in Brignais near Lyon. While French society allowed for some upward mobility, the nouveaux riches, the self-made men, were still socially frowned upon. In addition, the political scene had changed. Louis Philippeʼs reign had come to end in 1848 with the creation of the short- lived French Second Republic, and from 1851 on with Napoléon IIIʼs Second Empire. The social policies of both gave more rights to workers, curtailing the powers, and profits of employers, with medium-size companies most affected.

187 Sebert, Societés (cf. n. 110). 188 Ibid. 517. 189 The installation in the Grand Café du XIXe Siècle is described in the journal Le Gaz of 20 October 1857 Emile Durand, Carburation du gaz, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 1 (1857), 199; idem., Tristes symtoomes, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 1 (1857), 171–175. 190 Alexandre François Vaudore, merchant, rue de Seine 43. 191 With seat at rue Mazarine 42, Paris Sebert, Societés (cf. n. 110), 1120. 192 The patent rights for France (of 28 May 1856), as well as Württemberg (Germany) were sold to a Mr Durrich. Napoleon III, No. 8,893, Decret Imperial qui proclame 110 cessions de Brevets dʼin- vention du 13 Mars 1861, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France, 14, no. 919, 429–442, 441, no. 102. 193 The liquidators were Vaudore and Ledru Rey. Sebert, Societés (cf. n. 110). 194 Ambroise Firmin-Didot/Hyacinthe Firmin-Didot, Annuaire Gènéral du Commerce et de lʼIn- dustrie ou Almanach des 500,000 Adresses. Paris 1858, 634. Bourgeois Aspirations 291

Figure 4: Improvements in heating, English Patent dated 24 March 1851. Source: Specifications of English Patents (cf. n. 182), 270.

In January 1856 Ledru installed a heating system in the Cathedral of Basle (Switzerland) which performed so well that it attracted much attention in Swit- zerland and France.195 In late 1856 Ledru advertised in some Swiss papers that he had appointed Achille de Bournonville as director of his Geneva establishment,

195 See item in Basler Nachrichten (17 January 1856); Chronique de la Savoie, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 14 (1856), 3–4. 292 Dirk HR Spennemann noting that de Bournonville had gathered much «theoretical and practical knowledge while employed by the Corps des Ponts et Chaussées. »196 Ledru, together with Achille Louis Albert de Bournonville, formed the ‹So- ciété des Chauffages par les Calorifères› operating from Paquis in Geneva.197 In his marketing strategy for the central heating systems, Ledru seems to have followed the same formula he had already employed for when marketing galvanised iron: issuing publications that reproduce a technical appraisal, preferably the citation for the award of a gold medal, followed by a broad array of testimonials.198 The heaters found wide appeal and were installed throughout France and Switzerland, as well as in Belgium and the Kingdom of Sardinia.199 The 1860 book of testimonials lists 690 individual establishments in close to 250 towns, with almost two thirds of them in France.200 In 1865 they published a four-page pamphlet in which they set out some examples of heating installations and their operational costs.201 In the pamphlet they claim to have installed 25,000 systems, whereby it is not clear, whether this refers to separate sites. The hot air heaters, however, were not universally liked by factory workers.202 The patent registers show that Ledru and Achille Antoine Maximilien de Bournonville patented a new system of hot air heating on 2 May 1862, which was added to on 15 March 1864, with further patents in the same field in 1868.203 On a personal level, however, Ledru achieved some mobility in 1857 as his daughter married Adèle Sophie Ledru married Louis Albert Antione (Achille) de

196 Hector Ledru, Caloriféres, in: Gazette des Tribunaux 93, 94, 96 (1856), 2. 197 Ledru, de Bournonville, and Cie, Société des Chauffages par les Calorifères (cf. n. 180). 198 Ledru claimed that he had been awarded a platin medal by the Société dʼencouragement pour l‘industrie, a medal first class at the Exposition Universelle des produits de lʼAgriculture, de lʼIndustrie et des Beaux-Arts de Paris of 1855 and a medal at the LʼExhibition universelle de Besançon in 1860 Hector Ledru and de Bournonville, Gesellschaft für brevetirte Luftheizungen Hor. Ledru & de Bournonville für die Schweiz und Frankreich. Genf, den 1. März 1865, Zürich 1865. 199 Ledru, de Bournonville, and Cie, Société des Chauffages par les Calorifères (cf. n. 180). 200 France 434; Belgium 17; Switzerland 184; Sardinia 55 data from Ledru, de Bournonville, and Cie, Société des Chauffages par les Calorifères Calorifères (cf. n. 180). 201 Ledru/de Bournonville, Gesellschaft für brevetirte Luftheizungen (cf. n. 199). 202 F. Schuler, Die Glanerische Baumwollindustrie und ihr Einfluss auf die Gesundheit der Arbei- ter, in: Deutsche Vierteljahresschrift für öffentliche Gesundheitspflege 4 (1872), 90–133. 203 Original patent 2 May 1862. Napoleon III, No. 11,994 (cf. n. 112), 139f. no. 34; République Française, No. 6,591 Decret qui proclamé 37 cessions des Brevets dʼinvention du 11 September 1877, in: Bulletin des Lois de la République Française, 15 (1877), 991–995, 992, no. 8, addition 15 March 1864 III, No. 14,172 Decret Imperial qui proclame des Brevets dʼinvention et Certficats dʼaddition, 568, no. 1076; further 1868 brevet 53,997, Napoleon III, No. 16,460, Decret Imperial qui procla- mées Brevets dʼinvention et Certficats dʼaddition, in: Bulletin des Lois du Royaume de France 32 (1869), 901–957. Bourgeois Aspirations 293

Bournonville,204 the son of Ledruʼs business partner Achille Louis Albert de Bournonville205 The de Bournonvilles, an old established family with roots in the Artois, Boulonnais and Flanders, could trace their ancestry back to 1099.206 It seems that in 1864 or 1865 the elder de Bournonville withdrew form the business,207 and the company share went to Ledruʼs son in law, Albert Achille Louis de Bournonville.208 Upon the latterʼs death in 1872 Ledru appears to have continued to run, or at least supervise the company until it was eventually dissolved on 20 June 1872.209 Achilleʼs widow, Adéle Ledru (together with Placide Munaret, who had been appointed ‘surrogate guardianʼ of the minor Heléne de Bournon- ville), was forced to sell the family home, a maison burguois, on 21 December 1872.210 A price of 20,000 Francs had been set by the courts. Hector Ledru died on 28 July 1876 at Brignais.211 It appears that the remaining assets of the Société Ledru et Achille de Bournonville were then liquidated. The last remaining assets, it seems, were the patent rights which still had been held at that time by the Société Ledru et Achille de Bournonville; they were sold in 1876 by the companyʼs liquidator to Edmond Moise Oulman who then on-sold them soon after.212

Hector Ledru–an archetypical nineteenth century French entrepreneur?

Was Hector Ledru the archetypical nineteenth century French entrepreneur? We can only speculate what shaped Ledru as entrepreneur, but it appears reasonable to assume that the bankruptcy of his father would have been a primary lesson. Philippe Ledru was an ex-soldier turned land-owner, who had partnered with a second, likewise unskilled entrepreneur and invested the entire family fortune in

204 *13 April 1834 (Calais), ∞27 January 1857 at Geneva Gatboi. Bachelin Deflorenne, État pré- sent de la noblesse française, contenant le dictionnaire de la noblesse contemporaine, Paris 1873, 300ff 205 Achille Louis Albert de Bournonville 8 Sep 1805, † 23 Dec 1867, ∞1833 Marie Thérèse Herre- wyn (*1811) Ibid. 206 de Magny, Nobiliaire Universel de France (cf. n. 101). 207 He died in Paris on 26 December 1867. Ibid. 208 Ledru/de Bournonville, Gesellschaft für brevetirte Luftheizungen (cf. n. 199). 209 Edmond Moise Oulmann, Annonces Légales, Judiciares et Avis Divers. Notice 3518, in: Gazet- te des Tribunaux 12 (1872), 4. 210 Ibid. 211 Amis du Vieux Brignais. As no mention of Adéle Ledru née de Vinoy, we have to assume that she predeceased Hector Ledru. 212 Sold on 20 April 1877 to Henri Vincent, resident at Brignais. République Française, No. 6,591 (cf. n. 204), 992, no. 8. 294 Dirk HR Spennemann a single, ultimately ill-fated venture. Throughout his career, Hector Ledru seems to have favoured a business model of a range of small-scale partnerships, preferably with him as manager (Table 2). Having a small number of partners both spread the financial risk whilst at the same time avoided interference by out- siders. In all bar one case Ledru was the manager and principal stakeholder.213 It appears that in only a single instance, the Société pour la Galvanisation du Fer, did Ledru ever hold a major stake in a public shareholding company. His earlier experiences with fraudulent behaviour of the manager of the Société Ag- ricole et Industrielle de Montesson would have demonstrated to Ledru that unless he had some sort of managerial control he could not be sure of his investments. But even when in a managerial position, his experience with the concept of a public shareholding company must not have been favourable. A first he was co- manager of the Société pour la Galvanisation du Fer together with Stanislas Sorel, who was far more interested in the kudos that the invention brought him among the scientific community than in actual business applications.214 Not surprisingly the company was without focus. Once Ledru became the sole manager of the company, it may well have irked Ledru to have been subject to a scrutiny by su- pervisory board (conseil du surveillance) and to be answerable to a broad array of shareholders at the annual meetings. As such then Ledru fit Landesʼ characteri- sation of the French entrepreneur as highly independent, with his firm being «pretty much self-sufficient» also applies well to Ledru. Again, with the exception of the Société pour la Galvanisation du Fer, which essentially was a service industry, all of Ledruʼs ventures were stand-alone industries with ample growth potential. All required capital was either self-generated or leveraged from ac- quaintances. Setting aside his early involvement in the sugar industry and the inherent risk factors of variable harvests, Ledru ensured that he was independent on factors over which he had limited control. It is this independence and conservativism that would have limited his ability break into the league of major entrepreneurs. One can only speculate what might have happened if John Cockerillʼs investment and involvement had come to fru- ition. Unlike Landesʼ depiction of the French entrepreneur as «a fundamentally conservative man, with a firm distaste for the new and unknown,» however,

213 The exception was Robin et Cie, the successor company to Ledru, Robin et Cie (Table 2). In that instance Ledru had withdrawn from active management but remained a major co-owner. In the example, A Vinoy et Cie, Ledru was only nominally not the lead company owner. 214 See Sorelʼs long list of patents, medal and awards Spennemann, Inventing, Innovating and Investing. It would appear that Sorel was satisfied by the revenue stream derived from the patent and its licensing. Bourgeois Aspirations 295

Ledru embraced new technologies. He seems to have been an early adopter of mechanisation when involved in the sugar industry. From then on, Ledru seems to have sought out what he considered viable patents, or in the case of galvanisation, funded the inventor, and subsequently formed companies that exploited these patents. He also seems to have been reasonable judicious in divesting himself of assets when their growth potential had peaked. Examples for this are his withdrawal from the sugar industry, and later his withdrawal from the saw milling machinery businesses. In most instances he seems to have done well with his investments, but on occasion he badly misjudged the opportunities, whether due to gullibility or greed. Examples for this are the investments in Hainsselinʼs perpetuum mobile and Laurentʼs Napoleonic blue dye.215 Not until late in his career did Ledru morph into a more conservative entrepreneur, investing in and successfully running a major company installing centralised heating systems throughout northern and eastern France as well as western Switzerland. Ledru had become an established major figure, who, through his daughterʼs marriage, could even, at least in part, fulfil the ambitions of upwards social mobility so desired by the nouveaux riches. Yet, not quite. Hector Ledru came from a rural background, his father a former soldier who had recently acquired land. When his father went bankrupt, landed family was a life to which Hector had no hope of returning. Rather, he sought to make his mark in the fields of business and industrial production. As the various layers of the evolving Bourgeoisie began to differentiate in the sense of Daumart,216 Ledru occupied and navigated spaces in the second tier, made up of proprietors of smaller enterprise, layers and higher state employees and the like. He never really managed to break into the top level, that of major merchants, bankers and industrialists. While his sugar exhibit on the Kingʼs table in Amiens in 1827 had attained national and international mention, Ledruʼs subsequent business career was largely private. He secured some mention in journals that were published by professional societies of the day, but was not prominent in the public eye. As he grew older, and his business became more lucrative it seems, he dropped back into obscurity. As such he is an archetypical of French entrepreneur, most of

215 At least in the latter example he seems to have had a smaller financial loss as no company was set up. 216 Adeline Daumard, Biurgeoisue Diversité des milieux supérieurs et dirigeants, in: Ernest La- brousse/Fernand Braudel, Histoire économique et sociale de la France, Paris 1976. 296 Dirk HR Spennemann whom were second-tier rather than the beacons of industrialisation– and like most have never been examined in any depth.217 On a broader scale, Ledru exemplifies the gradual and incremental pace of industrialisation of the French manufacturing sector. A steady pace of progress in a range of sectors, none of which was dramatic and revolutionary. And where, as in the case of galvanisation, a truly revolutionary invention was at hand, its commercialisation almost timid. As such, then, Ledru is good example of a medium-scale French entrepreneur of the nineteenth century, who through his own work and business acumen rose above his upbringing, but who, due to circumstances or personal reticence and lack of risk taking, never broke through to become a truly notable figure in the business world.

Table 2: Business and company relationships of Hector Ledru

name of Société Period Partners Siége Line of Business (manufacture of)

1 Ledru et Cie 1825–1835 HL, & others Franvillers sugar (Somme) 2 Ledru et Bertin 1829–1835 HL, Edouard Bertin Roye (Somme) sugar 3 Ledru, Bertin et 1829–1835 HL, Edouard Bertin Francières sugar fils & others (Seine et Oise) 4 Hector Ledru <19 Feb 1835 HL barrels 5 Hector Ledru et <1 Mar 1836– HL, M dʼAthis wooden barrels Cie 3 July 1837 and flooring 6 Dathis et Ledru 1839–1845 M dʼAthis, HL wooden barrels and flooring 7 Hector Ledru, 30 May 1835– HL, Pierre-Nicolas rue du motor machine Hainsselin & Cie Hainsselin 29 Juillet 6 8 Hector Ledru et 9 Dec 1936– HL, Claude David, casks David 9 Hector Ledru, 9 Dec 1936– HL, Claude David, Marie- casks David & Cie Sep 1844 Claude-Eugéne Philippe 10 Sorel et Cie 21 Sep 1837 Stanislas Sorel, HL, Iso- rue de Trois galvanised iron 26 Dec 1839 dore Catheux Bornes 11 (Societé pour la Galva- nisation du Fer)

217 The large-scale examination French entrepreneurs compiled by Dominique Barjot, Les entrepreneurs du 2nd Empire, in: Dominique Barjot/Eric Anceau/Isabelle Lescent-Giles/Bruno Mar- not (eds.), Les entrepreneurs du 2nd Empire, Paris 2003. Bourgeois Aspirations 297

Table 2 (continued)

name of Société Period Partners Siége Line of Business (manufacture of)

11 Hector Ledru et 26 Dec 1839– HL, Stanislas Sorel, Iso- rue dʼAngou- galvanised iron Cie 26 Mar 1844 dore Catheux, John Co- leme-du-Tem- ckerill ple 40 12 A Vinoy et Cie 1843– Adéle de Vinoy, HL rue de Trois metal pipes Dec 1844 Bornes 15 13 Hector Ledru, 1 Mar 1845– HL, Louis Cheret, AdV(?) rue de Trois pipes Cheret et Cie 1 Jun 1847 Bornes 15 14 Robin et Cie 1 Jun 1847– HL, AdV, Pierre Robin rue dʼAngou- pipes ? Bernard Robin leme-du-Tem- ple 42 15 Ledru, Robin et 1 Jun 1846– HL, AdV, Pierre Robin rue dʼAngou- pipes Cie ? Bernard Robin leme-du-Tem- ple 42 16 Guillard, Ledru et 9 Jul 1857– Marie-Joseph Gulliard, rue de Rivoli heaters Cie 3 Nov 1857 HL, Jules Cropin, Théo- 164 dule Charles Launay (Société du Carburateur Launay) 17 Vaudore, Ledru 3 Nov 1857– Alexandre François Vau- rue Mazarine heaters et Cie dore, HL, Jules Cropin, 42 Théodule Charles Lau- nay(Société du Carbura- teur Launay) 18 Hector Ledru, de 1856–1867 Société des Chauffages Paquis (Ge- heaters Bournonville & par les Calorifères neva) Cie HL, Achille Louis Albert de Bournonville 19 Hector Ledru, de 1868–1872 HL, Louis Albert de Paquis (Ge- heaters Bournonville & Bournonville neva) Cie 20 Halley et Cie HL heaters

Abbreviations: AdV–Adéle de Vinoy/Ledru; HL–Hector Ledru.