prosperous England had now become, and how great a quantity of wealth had been accumulated, partly by trade, but also by the growth of manufactures, and by improvements in agriculture. Englishmen now felt strong enough to begin another struggle for the monopoly of trade,1 with the result that fresh wars were undertaken, and the country was heavily burdened with debt. But the wars were, on the whole, a success, though the wish for a monopoly was a mistake. We see, in fact, from this brief review, that the prosperity and development of modern English commerce, as we know it, had now begun. It was due, of course, not to the great wars we had waged for the right of a sole market, but to the fact that we were able to supply the markets of the world with manufactured goods which no other country could then produce. How we were able to do so will shortly be seen, when we come to speak of the Industrial Revolution of the last half of the eighteenth century. Meanwhile, we will glance at the state of our manufacturing industries in the period before this great change. 1 On the "sole market" theory, see Rogers, Econ. Interp., 323. 2 This was due very largely to the political troubles of other countries. Rogers, Econ. Interpretation, p. 289; and below, p. 358. CHAPTER XIX MANUFACTURES AND MINING § 183. Circumstances Favourable to English Manufactures. IT has been frequently remarked in previous chapters that Flanders was the great manufactory of Europe throughout the Middle Ages, and up to the sixteenth century. Her competition would in any case have been sufficient to check much export of manufactured goods from England, though we had by the sixteenth century got past the time when most of our imports of clothing came from Flanders. But, at the end of the sixteenth century, Flemish competition was practically annihilated, owing to the ravages made in the Low Countries by the Spanish persecutions and occupation. But England did not benefit merely by the cessation. of Flemish competition: she received at the same time. hundreds of Flemish immigrants, who greatly improved our home manufactures, and thus our prosperity was doubly assisted. The result is seen in the fact that our export of wool diminished, while the export of cloth increased, till at the close of the seventeenth century woollen goods formed two-thirds of our total exports.3 § 184. Wool Trade. 2 Home Manufactures. Dyeing. In the reign of James I. the wool trade is even said to have declined, and certainly we know that little wool can have been exported, for nearly all that produced in England was used for home manufacture. On the other hand, however, the same fact shows that the manufacturing industry was * Above, pp. 221, 230. 1 Above, p. 230. 3 Davenant, Of Gain in Trade (1699), p. 47. ♦ Craik, British Commerce, ii. 34, who thinks the decline partly due to the effects of the monopoly granted to Cockayne. rising in importance, for it required all the home-grown wool that could be got; and, in 1648, and again in 1660, the export of British wool was for this reason forbidden,1 and remained so till 1825. The woollen cloth trade was very largely in the hands of the Merchant Adventurers,2 against whose methods serious complaints were sometimes made,3 but the manufacturing industry flourished steadily, and a considerable part of the population was now engaged in it. The usefulness of our climate, too, for this particular manufacture had been discovered, and was now recognised, while the manufacturing industry was likewise aided by the impetus given to dyeing by the exertions of Sir Walter Raleigh. Previously to James I.'s reign most English goods had to be sent to the Netherlands to be dyed, as was explained above; but Raleigh called attention to this fact, and proposed to grant a monopoly for the art of dyeing and dressing. It was by his advice that the export of English white goods was prohibited (1608), a proceeding which caused considerable discussion and controversy.8 At the same time a monopoly was granted to Sir William Cockayne, giving him the exclusive right of dyeing and dressing all woollen cloths.9 But the Dutch and German cities immediately retaliated by prohibiting the import of any dyed cloths from England, and great confusion arose. "Cockayne was disabled from selling his cloth anywhere but at home, beside that his cloths were worse done, and yet were dearer, than those finished in Holland. There was a very great clamour, therefore, raised against this new project by the weavers now employed, so that the king was obliged to 1 Scobell, Acts, i. 138, and the 12 Charles II., c. 32. 2 Cf. Cunningham, Growth of Industry, ii. 120. 3 Craik, British Commerce, ii. 35. Bishop Burnet remarked this to Davenant; Davenant, Works, ii. 235. 5 Gardiner, History, ii. 386. • Observations concerning the Trade and Commerce of England with the Dutch and other Foreign Nations; cf. Craik, British Commerce, ii. 9-12; Smith, Memoirs of Wool, ch. xxx., xxxi. 7 Craik, British Commerce, ii. 33. 8 Smith, Memoirs of Wool, ch. xxxi.-xxxvi. Gardiner, History, ii. 386, 387; Smith, Memoirs of Wool, ch. xxxi. and It seems doubtful whether Cockayne's patent was granted in 1608-9 or 1616; see Smith, u. 8. notes. permit the exportation of a limited quantity of white cloths; and a few years after (1615) for quieting the people he found himself under the necessity of annulling Cockayne's patent." 1 Thus the monopoly failed in its object, as such attempts usually do, but still it is worth noticing as an instance of what was then the universal policy of subjecting industry to various regulations, either for the benefit of those concerned in the industry itself, or because it was thought that benefit might accrue to the State in general. The regulation of industry was, in fact, regarded as quite right and necessary, either for purely political purposes,3 or to maintain the quality of manufactures; and though in modern times the tendency has rather been to get rid of State regulation altogether, there are still a fair number of cases where industry is more or less supervised by the State for the good of the community.* § 185. Other Influences Favourable to England. The Huguenot Immigration. But other influences were at work in the seventeenth century in favour of our home industries. It becomes more and more apparent that our insular position was specially suitable for the development of manufactures as soon as they made a fair start. Except for the Parliamentary War, which did not disturb the industry of the country very much for there is no sign of undue exaltation of prices, or anything else that points to commercial distress 5-England was free from the terrible conflicts that desolated half Europe in the Thirty Years' War. Our own Civil War was conducted with hardly any of the bloodshed, plunder, and rapine that make war so disastrous. But the Thirty Years' War (1619-1648) did not cease till the utter exhaustion of the combatants made peace inevitable, and till every leader who had taken part in the beginning of the 1 Anderson, Chron. Deduct. Commerce, ii. 232. 2 Cunningham, Growth of Industry, ii. 157. 3 E.g., the export of bullion was prohibited for political reasons. struggle was in his grave. Germany was effectually ruined,1 and with Germany and Flanders laid low, England had little to fear from foreign competition. And just at this moment the folly of our neighbour, the French King Louis XIV., induced him to deprive his nation of most of its skilled workmen by the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. His loss was our gain. The Edict in question, passed nearly a century previously, had insured freedom of worship to the French Huguenots, who comprised in their ranks the élite of the industrial population. Louis XIV.2 set to work to exterminate the Protestant religion in France, and began by revoking this Edict (1685). Once more England profited by her Protestantism, and, owing to the religious opinions of her people, received a fresh accession of industrial strength. Some thousands of skilled Huguenot artisans and manufacturers came over and settled in this land. They greatly improved the silk, glass, and paper trades, and exercised considerable influence in the development of domestic manufactures generally. It is said that the immigrants numbered 50,000 souls, with a capital of some £3,000,000.5 Every one knows how they introduced the silk industry into this country, and how Spitalfields long remained a colony of Huguenot silk-weavers. Their descendants are to be found in every part of England. § 186. Distribution of the Cloth Trade. From this time forward the cloth trade, in especial, took its place among the chief industries of the country, largely owing to the fresh spirit infused into it, first by Flemish, and afterwards by French weavers. We have already seen where it chiefly flourished in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and now it became more and more widely distributed." 1 Rogers, Econ. Interpretation of History, 287. 2 See Voltaire, Siècle de Louis XIV., ch. xxxii. 3 Cf. Anderson, Chron. Deduct. Commerce, ii. 568. ▲ Ib., ii. 569. 5 Ib., ii. 569. • Voltaire, Siècle de Louis XIV., ch. xxxii.; Lecky, History of the Eighteenth Century, i. 191. 7 For the following details, cf. Rogers, Hist. Agric., v. 95, and the Act 4 and 5 James I., c. 2. |