Local history

Out and about in Mill, Lea Mills and the Chris Wrigley

A Prospect of , unknown artist, 1725. The right-hand big building in the foreground is the water-powered silk mill. Derby Museums

romford Mill, one of the best appeal of this area for the establishment specified horse power to operate his Cknown, and the Lumsdale Valley, of industry in the early period of British water-frame, but he very quickly saw one of the least known of the early industrialization, its early successes in the advantages of water wheels common industrial sites, are linked today by being before location and other matters in the eighteenth century, as they had managed by the . They led to the area being superseded by already been successfully harnessed for have also been the subject of a recent . corn and power. Cromford appealed BBC1 programme in a series: ‘Britain’s The significance of regional to him because the supplies of water Hidden Heritage’. They are located in industrial development in the Industrial did not freeze in winter and had been . is just off Revolution has been emphasized by Pat successfully used by corn and other the A6 at Cromford, near Matlock. The Hudson and others. In the area discussed mills. Yet, as Stanley Chapman has Lumsdale Valley is on the outskirts of in this essay, Arkwright’s technological emphasised, the first mill at Cromford, Matlock, off the Chesterfield Road at changes led to a cluster of mills trying established in 1771, was poorly supplied Upper Lumsdale, towards . Both to exploit the fresh opportunities in by water from the Bonsall Brook.2 sites operated using waterpower, and cotton , before the locational Arkwright soon realized the need for both suffered from being remote from disadvantages became very apparent and greater waterpower when he built a supplies of raw material and from their they turned away from full reliance on second, larger mill close by. Even then, markets. At the end of his life Arkwright cotton and diversified into wool, finance he needed an eight horse-power engine attempted to remedy Cromford’s poor or other interests.1 to raise water to ensure the steady location by supporting the construction ’s two mills running of his water-wheel. of the . Nearby is at Cromford were at the heart of late Arkwright’s choice of Cromford is another enterprise of the Arkwright era, eighteenth century industrialization also often attributed to the availability Lea Mills, but, unlike Cromford and the in the . For a short of labour that was used to Lumsdale Valley , are period Arkwright (1732-92) was in work through the earlier putting-out still being produced there by the firm of the vanguard of mechanized cotton system. production needed an John Smedley. This essay explores the spinning. In his 1769 patent he had ample labour force, and Arkwright at

26 The Historian / Autumn 2011 View from 1775 building over the water channel with remains of the second mill across the channel’s end.

Arkwright at Cromford employed some an apprentice house for 90 pauper protective of his technological 200 people in his first mill and 450 in children.5 Early on he behaved in the innovations and his patents and, his second mill by 1777. Arkwright manner of a paternalist squire in putting unlike some other mill owners, did set up in an area with many men on festivals, involving parades and a not permit visitors to look round his engaged in lead mining while women supper from September 1772. From mills. Nevertheless, the general secrets and children were available for textiles. 1776 this annual event in September of his machinery were taken to France Arkwright liked to emphasise that marked candle-lighting. It began with a by Englishmen, two of whom, John his machinery offered poor people celebratory parade led by a band round Theakston and John Flint, had worked employment. He also advertised further Cromford, followed by consuming beer, for Arkwright at Cromford. Other afield, seeking labour from buns, fruit and nuts, then an evening former employees of Arkwight or his and in particular. He of dancing. He also paid for balls at the partner, (1726-97), placed an advert in The Daily Mercury Greyhound Inn for his workpeople and such as (an apprentice 13 December 1771 for some skilled their families.6 of Strutt) and Thomas Marshall (a workers: ‘two Journeymen Clock- Cromford had an advantage of manager of ), were hired Makers, or others that understand being well away from major dangers at high salaries to develop cotton Tooth and Pinion well’, ‘a smith that can of -wrecking. Arkwright’s mill spinning in the United States. The forge and file’ and ‘two Wood Turners of 1777 at Birkacre, near , was French apparently thought Arkright’s that have been accustomed to Wheel- destroyed by people whose livelihoods exercise of his patent in Britain would making, Spole-turning’ and other such were threatened by the Arkwright-style harm the British economy, whereas work. In addition he wanted ‘weavers factory. In October 1779 Arkwright the unrestricted use of his in residing at the mill’ plus women and sufficiently feared an attack at Cromford France would enable France to overtake children.3 Such a way of attracting labour to prepare the defence of his mills with Britain in textiles.7 Arkwright, of course, was not enough. He needed to build a cannon and small arms as well as the did not see it that way. After he lost village for his workforce at Cromford support of lead miners whose wives and his patent case Arkwright talked to and to secure a supply of goods for its children worked for him. Josiah Wedgwood(1730-95) of having market place, he even offered prizes to It has also been suggested that an his machinery made public, publishing the best traders.4 Arkwright employed attraction of Cromford was that it was ‘descriptions and copper plates of all the few paupers at Cromford, unlike Samuel relatively safe from industrial espionage. parts, that it might be known to foreign Greg at Styal who spent £300 building Arkwright was understandably nations as well as our own’, something

The Historian / Autumn 2011 27 Local history

Chris Wrigley and Charlie Luxford filming ‘Britain’s Hidden Heritage’ in the 1775 building (linked to the first Cromford Mill, 1771).

Wedgwood deprecated as making the (1728-1809), his fellow manufacturer gadgets and inventions became focused many suffer for the anti-patent action and patent holder, felt that if Arkwright on making his fortune by successfully of a few.8 The point is that Arkwright’s had not charged such high prices to use applying rollers to cotton spinning to innovations were highly important his patents and not pursued his defence supply the strong consumer demand for and the details were eagerly sought of his patents with such zeal, he would cotton goods. He had some mechanical by potential competitors at home and not have united other manufacturers skills but, generally, his innovations abroad, who offered former employees against him and ‘he might have gone on were carried out with some assistance handsome sums to divulge the details. and got £40,000 {per annum} by all the from skilled mechanics following his Perhaps in developing his machinery works he has now erected, even if there instructions. He had a magpie eye for at Cromford Arkwright could expect be some interlopers’.11 Nevertheless, successful aspects of existing mechanical his work to remain secret at least a little Arkwright’s water-frame patent lasted and other developments. He was as longer than if in a big city. from1769 to 1785, and his great wealth much an innovator as an inventor. In the At the heart of his drive for profits owed a great deal to his exploitation of case of his , patented in 1769, were Arkwright’s patents. His patents his patents. he was building on earlier less successful protected him from others taking up his The original Cromford Mill was attempts to use rollers in cotton successful technological developments very much a base for testing Arkwright’s spinning. , in association and patenting them as their own. innovatory machines and factory with John Wyatt, a mechanic, had Moreover, as Christine Macleod has organization. Wadsworth and Fitton developed with limited success a system observed, ‘Arkright’s water-frame observed that early on the first Cromford he patented in 1738. Arkwright may was developed to use a centralized mill was ‘then more of an experimental also have been influenced by the way power source in the context of factory machine-shop than a properly equipped rollers were used in the iron industry. production: distinctive and factory spinning factory’.12Arkwright and his He took the key matter of effective –based, it was an ideal subject for associates were learning on the job, gearing from clock making. Arkwright’s patenting’.9 However, Arkwright went adapting and adjusting as was found to big achievement was to get a system of too far. He sought to milk patents much be desirable. rollers to work well. Associated with in the way that early Stuart figures had Arkwright’s initial success lay in his this development was his second major sought wealth through monopolies. This persistence in seeking an effective means contribution to the cotton industry, his had been the route taken by Lewis Paul of using rollers in cotton spinning. machine which ensured a steady (died 1759) who claimed, probably with Arkwright had begun his career in and even flow of cotton into his spinning exaggeration, to have made £300,000 improving one of the consumer goods machinery, his water frame. Again, from his patents. Arkwright prioritized popular after 1660, namely developing Arkwright drew on others’ successes in defending his patents, spending huge an improved method of dyeing hair for producing a new machine that worked sums in the courts on what became a wigs. However, from early on he had a very well.13 hopeless cause. His major court cases taste for talking about mechanical items At Cromford Arkwright also included one against his near neighbour, and for making ‘a hundred curious developed efficient , with Peter Nightingale.10 Matthew Boulton knackey things’. His fascination with machinery on several floors driven by

28 The Historian / Autumn 2011 A picture of the first mill, Cromford. Lumsdale Valley: ruins beside the gorge.

Smedley’s Mill. water power. Again, Arkwright was building on practices elsewhere. One of these was perhaps the first large factory, the ( built 1717-23), which was successfully run by John and Thomas Lombe (1693-1722 and 1685-1739), which had machinery for winding, spinning and twisting silk that was powered by a waterwheel and employed some 300 people. Another precedent was the water powered cotton factory in a converted corn mill in Northampton which Lewis Paul established in 1743.14 Strutt, and presumably Arkwright, knew at least the Derby Silk Mill. Arkwright was also adept at organizing production, including managing labour according Arkwright, but his family had experience in 1819. Eight years later, John Smedley, to the needs of work regulated by of textiles, probably including the the father, was devastated by the death factory time. Arkwright’s system spread putting-out system which preceded of his younger son, George (1808-27), quickly.15 In 1788 Patrick Colquhon factory production. His great niece, and chose then to retire from active (1745-1820) estimated there were 143 Florence, gave welfare advice to the involvement in the business. The business Arkwright-style mills, and later analysis mill’s employees on her return from became highly profitable once John, the suggested an average investment of the Crimea. The Nightingales held son, had managed successfully to adapt £3,000 per mill.16 the freehold to the mill until 1893. cotton machinery for the production of The Cromford area was also one of However, as with Cromford, cotton high quality (merino) woollen knitwear.19 several sources for Arkwright of working spinning was soon less viable and by the Like Arkwright, Smedley worked with capital during his career. Capital from end of the eighteenth century Lea Mill skilled mechanics and on his own to the profits of lead mining went into the was moving in to wool spinning and develop effective technology to mass- Derby bank of Crompton, Evans and knitting.18 Arkwright had been confident produce the right goods for large markets Co. which made loans to Arkwright as of adapting his mechanized production and, also like Arkwright, substantial did Wrights of Nottingham17. Like other from cotton to wool, but never actually wealth followed within relatively few successful entrepreneurs of this and the did so, but this was achieved at Lea Mill. years. Also, Smedley’s managerial nineteenth century, most of his finance The mill was leased by John Smedley abilities played their part in his success. came from ploughing back profits. (1764- 1840) in 1818. He had been a He was an early riser, was deemed to Lea Mill, a few miles beyond spinner of for hosiery on a have the energy of two men and had a Cromford Mill and bridge, was small scale in , apparently a very ‘hands-on’ approach, checking and built on the site of a medieval flour business established by his grandfather, even doing work at various stages of the mill in 1784 by Peter Nightingale but chose to move to nearby Lea Mill for production process. (1820-1910) for cotton spinning and bigger scale production. John’s son, also John Smedley had taken over manufacturing calico. In turning to named John (1803-74), was apprenticed from his father in 1827 and by 1840 factory production he was following to his father as a hosier and wool comber (at the age of 37) he believed he had

The Historian / Autumn 2011 29 Modern day production at Smedley’s Mill. the limited alternative employment, was surely a major consideration in choosing to produce textiles at Lea Mills. Smedley was generous according to the times in side benefits but not in wage rates, especially in his early years of high profits. He offered early welfare provision. Early on he had a considerable faith in pills, and gave his sick employees Fearn’s Family Pills. In 1853, after his recovery through hydrotherapy, he established a free hospital at considerable cost at his mill, and gave sick people what he believed to be the considerable benefits of this form of treatment. He provided subsidized tea, coffee, porridge and had meals prepared in the mill’s dining hall. He also provided those female workers who lived three or four miles from the factory with rainwear. On occasion, he amassed enough money to retire. He Quite clearly John Smedley invested even went in for bulk buying and selling did buy an estate in Cheltenham, but heavily in his second enterprise. It to his workers at a little above cost price he was unable to sell the business so he grew to 76 bedrooms in 1859 and to 94 flour and American clocks.25 Perhaps in continued running the firm until his bedrooms in 1867. He did not need to this he was emulating the co-operative marriage in 1846. While on honeymoon advertise his hydro as people flocked movement. The Derby Co-operative in Switzerland he became very ill, with to take the treatments at two guineas Society, for instance, had been founded accounts differing as to whether he a week. Apparently, 2000 people per about 1850 in Sadler Gate, Derby.26 suffered a severe chill or contracted year attended the Smedleys’ hydro in Although Arkwright was much typhoid. This changed him from a 1867 and 3000 in 1874. After John more motivated by social aspirations man of rude health to being weak and Smedley’s death the hydro remained a than Smedley, they both spent part of depressed. After trying conventional going concern until the Second World their wealth on ostentatious homes. In medicine for some two years from War, after which it made losses and John Smedley’s case he poured some 1848, Smedley turned to alternative in1955 it was compulsorily purchased by £70,000 into Castle from 1862. remedies, most notably hydrotherapy as Derbyshire County Council (which still After Caroline Smedley’s death in 1892 practised by Dr William Macleod at Ben occupies the building).22 became home to a boys’ Rhydding ( a hydro set up about 1844), John Smedley also fostered another school, in 1936 it was bought by Matlock near Otley, Yorkshire.20 The treatment major interest. During his period of Urban District Council, was used by the which involved a mix of very cold poor health he became very religious. Ministry of Defence during the Second and very hot water, a severe diet and He had little time for either Anglican World War, and later the site became a fresh air worked for him. He became or for the conventional Nonconformist wildlife park until 2000. However, John an evangelist for hydrotherapy, first beliefs. Instead he developed his own and Caroline Smedley also were notable providing it free for his workforce and at variant of Wesleyan Methodism. He for their generous philanthropy. After first for others. He and his wife initially spent nearly £10,000 building churches his death she founded the Smedley ran their hydro, doing so with rules as and schools in the area: at Matlock Memorial Hospital at Matlock Bank.27 strict as at his factory. Demand became Bank, Ashover Butts, Holloway, Higham, Lea Mills is still a successful great so John and Caroline Smedley Bonsall and Birchwood-by-Alfreton. enterprise and a relatively rare example expanded their hydro several times, He preached fiery sermons in these of a long surviving family firm. There was notably from 1853. An account of their buildings as well as, from 1853, in a an older family firm in Hinckley, Atkins, hydro of about 1857 included: giant marquee he took to other villages, which ran from Robert Atkins and a often along with a choir.23 Smedley sold cottage industry initially in 1723 through From the road it looks like a hybrid his Cheltenham estate and returned to to factory production, ending with the building, uniting the characteristics of direct management of his mill. Fired up retirement of Tom Atkins in 1994, when a factory, a workhouse, and a barrack with religion, from his return he started the firm was taken over by Coats Viyella. – high walls of monotonous gray stone, the working day at the mill with a half With Lea Mills, after the death of John pierced with small windows peering out hour compulsory service held in the Smedley, the business was owned by in rows…..but its front aspect is of an dining building or, in summer, in his his cousin John Thomas Marsden, who entirely different nature. A double row of marquee, the employees being paid for adopted the surname Smedley (1840- terraces abutting on a garden slope: long that time.24 77). He was succeeded by his son, John corridors with gravel walks beside them; Smedley was very much the Bertram Marsden- Smedley (1868-1959), a range of extensive rooms, the front of stern paternalist employer. He firmly who was chairman and manager for which is formed of glass, glittering all day controlled his workforce, operating, as seventy years. The family continued to while the sun is shining, and at night seen was common, a system of fines. They run the firm through a son-in-law (Ian far across the valley when lighted up from prayed with him at the morning service D. Maclean, 1902-86) and a grandson within; and above them tier upon tier of and they worked hard. He brooked (Andrew B. Marsden-Smedley). In windows, with a balcony in front of each no dissent, and boasted that there had contrast, in the nearby Lumsdale Valley set, all fantastically coloured, gaudily never been a strike at his mill. The most of what remains today can be gleaming with red and blue and gold.21 docility of his rural labour force, given termed industrial archaeology.

30 The Historian / Autumn 2011 Once again the location chosen had national debt and also of ‘buying up all Manufactures (London, Fontana, 1985), pp.126, 213 and 244-45. proven use of waterpower. By the end of the cotton in the world in order to make 15 For a discussion of this, see Pat Hudson, the sixteenth century there had been a an enormous profit by the monopoly’.34 The (London,Edward corn mill using the Bentley Brook in the Yet he was a dynamic acquisitive figure, Arnold,1992), pp.27-9. 16 Stanley Chapman and John Butt, The Cotton Lumsdale Valley near Tansley. Following motivated by upward social mobility, Industry,1775-1856’ in Charles Feinstein and on from the success of Arkwright at building his huge mansion – Willersley Sidney Pollard, Studies In Capital Formation Cromford, a mill was built in about 1785 Castle – and achieving the respect of his in The ,1750-1920 (Oxford, Clarendon Press,1988),p.106. by Watts, Lowe and Company. It drew peers. Not surprisingly he was one of 17 Katrina Honeyman, Origins of Enterprise: on a large mill pond (known now as Samuel Smiles’ heroes of self help.35 Business Leadership in the Industrial Revolution the Upper Pond, of three). This cotton (Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1982),pp.27-8. mill operated until 1813, when it failed 18 John T. Millington, John Smedley Ltd in Profile economically and was sold to John Cromford Mill is open to the public, (Smedley,1984),p.6. Garton. Thereafter, as Garton Mill the with guided tours put on by the 19 Henry Steer, The Smedleys Of Matlock Bank (London, Elliot Stock, 1897). John Agg building was used for bleaching. In its Arkwright Society. The Society Large, John Smedley of Matlock (Ripley, area of the Lumsdale Valley there were manages the Lumsdale Valley, offering Footprint Press,1996) .John N. Merrill, John seven mills; at various times they ground occasional guided tours. Smedley , Smedley,(Waltham Cross, John Merrill Foundation, 2002). Henry Douglas, John Smedley corn, bones or ingredients for paint, with prior arrangement, arranges and his Hydro (Matlock, George Giggleswick, sawed wood or smelted lead. Now the group visits to the factory, while its 2003). Grayson Carter, ‘Smedley, John (1803- valley is a heritage site, which combines factory shop is often open. Nearby are 74)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford University Press, 2004). natural beauty and the remains of the attractive Lea Gardens, formally 20 Steer, Smedleys,pp.7-8. industrial buildings, and is managed by the gardens of John Marsden Smedley, 21 Steer, Smedleys, p.41. the Arkwright Society.28 which are open to the public. 22 Large, John Smedley, p. 8. Douglas, Smedley And His Hydro, pp.6 and 23-5. The Cromford, Lea and Garton 23 Large, John Smedley, pp.10-12. mills provide an interesting microcosm 24 Steer, Smedleys, pp.19-21. Large, John Smedley, of the spread of the Arkwright-style p.14 Reference 25 Steer, Smedleys,pp.18-19 cotton spinning factories of the late 1 Pat Hudson, Regions and Industries: Perspectives 26 George Jacob Holyoake, Jubilee History of the eighteenth century. Arkwright in the on the Industrial Revolution (Cambridge, Derby Co-operative Provident Society Ltd.,1850- 1770s was the man to emulate. It was Cambridge University Press,1989). John Wilson 1900 (Manchester, 1900). and Andrew Popp (eds), Industrial Clusters And 27 Steer, Smedleys, pp.79-82 and 101. Carter, ‘John his approach that excited French cotton Regional Business Networks In , 1750- Smedley’. spinners, who eagerly paid relatively 1970 (Aldershot, Ashgate,2003). 28 Derbyshire UK: Guide to Derbyshire and the 2 high sums to men who had worked Stanley D. Chapman, The Early Factory Masters : Ancient Mills (www.derbyshireuk. (Newton Abbot, David and Charles, 1967),pp. net/mills4.htm/ ). Arkwright Society leaflet,The for and been trained by Arkwright. 64-5. R.S Fitton, The Arkwrights: Spinners of Lumsdale Valley (n.d.). I greatly benefited from a In Germany, emulation even led to Fortune (Manchester, Manchester University guided tour of the valley by Julian Burgess of the Press, 1989), p.29. Arkwright Society, September 2009. there being a Cromford in Ratingen, 3 R.S. Fitton and A.P. Wadsworth, The Strutts 29 At www.stadt-ratingen.de/en/index.shtn Germany, which now claims to be ‘the and the Arkwrights, 1758-1830 (Manchester, (accessed 21 June 2011). oldest mechanical cotton spinning mill Manchester University Press, 1958), p.65. Spole- 30 Stanley Chapman, The Cotton Industry on the continent of Europe’ (1783/4).29 turning was making containers for spools of in the Industrial Revolution (London, thread. Macmillan(1972),p.29. Arkwright was lionized in Scotland, 4 T.S.Ashton, An Economic History of 31 Fitton and Wadsworth, Strutts and Arkwrights, being admired as a major industrial England: The Eighteenth Century (London, pp. 106-7. Methuen,1955),p.214. 32 Mary Rose, Firms, Networks and Business Values entrepreneur. By 1797 Stanley Chapman 5 Mary Rose, The Gregs of (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2000), p.69. has estimated that about a third of the (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 33 Tim Leunig and Jonathan Voth, ‘Spinning 900 or so cotton mills then in existence 1986),p.28-9 and105-11. Jane Humphries, Welfare: the Gains from Process Innovation 30 Childhood and Child Labour in the British in Cotton and Car Production’, Centre for was of the Arkwright variety. In Industrial Revolution (Cambridge, Cambridge Economic Performance Discussion Paper, Derbyshire there were at least eighteen University Press, 2010). 1050(May 2011).They analyse 1784-1810, when by 1789, being at , (2), 6 Fitton, Arkwrights, pp203-4. the cost of fell by 90 per cent. 7 J.R. Harris, Industrial Espionage and Technology 34 Edward Baines, The History of the Cotton Calver, Cressbrook, Darley, Derby (2), Transfer: Britain and France in the Eighteenth Manufacture in Great Britain(1835, second Litton, Matlock (2), Milford, Wilne Century (London, Ashgate, 1998),pp. 168, 364- edition, London, Cass, 1966), p196. 72,376 and 407. Fitton, Arkwrights, p. 81. 35 On the Victorians and their celebration of the and Wirksworth as well as those at 8 31 Wedgwood’s Common Place Book (about end of ‘heroes of invention’ see the excellent study Cromford, Lea and Tansley. 1785-early 1786), quoted in R.S. Fitton and A.P. by Christine Macleod, Heroes of Invention As for Arkwright himself, he Wadsworth, The Strutts and the Arkwrights: A (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, amassed a fortune in two decades, Study of the Early (Manchester 2007). For an 1859 assessment of Arkwright University Press, 1958), p.88. as an energetic and ruthless entrepreneur, even though Derbyshire lacked the 9 Christine MacLeod, Inventing The Industrial see R.H. Campbell and R.G. Wilson (eds), advantages of Lancashire. For a short Revolution (Cambridge, Cambridge University Entrepreneurship in Britain 1750-1939 (London, Press, 1988),p.103. A and C Black,1975), pp. 45-7. In contrast, for period he was the price leader in cotton 10 32 John Hewish, ‘New Light on the some of the many entrepreneurs who failed spinning. He made a substantial Arkwright Patent Trials’, Technology and in the eighteenth century, see Julian Hoppitt, contribution to the very impressive Culture,28,1,January 1987, pp. 80-6. Risk and Failure In British Business (Cambridge, social savings estimated to have been 11 A.P. Wadsworth and Julia Mann, The Cambridge University Press, 1987). Cotton Trade and Industrial Lancashire, made by cotton spinning; the most 1600-1780(Manchester, Manchester University recent analysis has found that the benefit Press),p.490. of process innovation amounted to 17.6 12 Fitton and Wadsworth, Strutts and Arkwrights, Chris Wrigley is Professor of Modern p.68. British History at Nottingham per cent of GDP (and so being higher 13 For an excellent recent review of Arkwright’s than either railways or the internet). 33 contributions see Robert C. Allen, The University and a former President of Nevertheless, Sir Richard Arkwright British Industrial Revolution In Global the Historical Association (1996- Perspective (Cambridge, Cambridge University 99). His most recent book is the seems an old fashioned figure in some Press,2009),pp. 195-201. George W. Daniels,The respects, dreaming of ever greater Early Cotton Industry (Manchester, Manchester jointly edited Britain’s Second Labour monopolies. According to Edward University Press, 1920), pp.76-9. For Arkwright’s Government, 1929-31: A Reappraisal background, see Fitton, Arkwrights, pp.7-15. (MUP, 2011). Baines, the early historian of the cotton 14 Wadsworth and Mann, Cotton Trade, pp.354- industry, he spoke of himself paying the 5 and 419-48. Maxine Berg, The Age of

The Historian / Autumn 2011 31