16th July 1812: The second Parliamentary report into the Framework-knitters petitions is released

The SELECT COMMITTEE appointed to take into Consideration the several Petitions, which have been presented to this House, in this Session of Parliament, by the Persons employed in the FRAMEWORK-KNITTING Trade; and to examine the Matters thereof, and report the same, with their Observations thereupon, to the House; and who were empowered to report the Minutes of the Evidence taken before them; and to whom several Petitions of Persons carrying on or concerned in the Trade and Business of HOSIERS, were referred;—HAVE considered the Matters submitted to them; and have agreed upon the following REPORT:

YOUR Committee proceeded to examine the Witnesses produced by the Hosiers, and to hear the Objections to the different Clauses in the Bill now before the House, for preventing Frauds and Abuses is in the Framework-knitting Manufacture, and in the payment of Persons employed therein: They have heard evidence a considerable length from the Nottingham Hosiers, but did not think it necessary to hear evidence at the same length from the Hosiers of Leicester, as they stated to the Committee, that their testimony would be generally given to the same purport as that already taken.

Your Committee, in their former Report, stated the difficulties they had met with in procuring full and satisfactory evidence on the general state of the Framework-knitting Trade, and therefore necessarily made a Report founded almost entirely on ex-parte evidence: but they now proceed to inform the House, that from the evidence since adduced on the part of the Hosiers, they feel themselves called upon to state, that a considerable difference has taken place in their opinion as to the propriety of enacting several other provisions in the Bill.

Your Committee have been confirmed in the Opinion expressed in their former Report, that the Workmen suffer considerable inconveniences, and are liable to deductions in various ways, in the payment for their work: but They have found it very difficult to suggest measures that can meet or obviate all those abuses; being of opinion that legislative enactments alone will not have that effect; and that trade of every kind should be left as much as possible to find its own level.

Your Committee, however, on consideration of the whole Evidence, beg leave strongly to recommend the removal from the Bill of certain Clauses relative to the Hosiery business; and also to recommend the enactment of certain Regulations for the Lace Trade, which they confidently hope will tend to remove much dissatisfaction between the Masters and Workmen in that trade, and to encourage a more general use of that article, by ensuring its more serviceable and perfect quality.

Your Committee are so strongly impressed with the importance of some relief being given to the Trade at this moment, that they feel it to be their imperious duty to press it upon the immediate consideration of the House; and, notwithstanding they can see no objection to the provisions of the Bill, they consider it in some degree as a Bill experiment, and therefore recommend it to be passed only for a limited time, by inserting a clause, that unless it shall be renewed by Parliament, it shall expire early in the year 1815.

14th July 1812: Gravenor Henson informs Nottingham that the Select Committee have butchered the Framework-knitter's Bill

1812. July 14

London 

Dr Sir

It is with extreme regret, I have to inform you that the Committee of the House of Commons, have come to the decision of Reporting that the Clauses of our Bill which relate to Hosiery ought [to] be erased They have reported in Fafour of the Hosiers to their utmost satisfaction notwithstanding every effort we have made The Cause as it respects Hosiery is completely lost, We are very reluctantly I assure you preparing a Bill to extend to Lace, and the Prohibition of Payment in Goods: The Committee have in the most unfeeling manner but not without a Division decided against us, on the foolishest lying evidince that was ever given.

I am Sir Yours

G. Henson.

P.S. They may Dock, Cut up. Square, Make Single Cotton, and Cheat, Rob, Pilfer and Oppress now to their hearts content.

P.S. Write instructions by Return of Post what we are to do, respecting the Pursuing the Bill any further as it applies to Lace &c.

[Addressed to:] Mr Thos Roper . . . Nottingham.

13th July 1812: Second & final day of Hosiers submissions to the Select Committee on the Framework-knitters petitions

On Monday 13th July 1812, the Parliamentary Select Committee into the Framework-knitters Petitions heard the second and final day of evidence from four Hosiers.

Thomas Nelson, a hosier from Nottingham, spoke first. Like the other Hosiers that had previously given evidence, he attributed the decline of trade to the War and denied that 'fraudulent goods' were the issue - even that they were made and sold - but admitted that the goods his workers manufactured would be prohibited under the proposed Bill. Nelson was not above using moral blackmail to make a point - he shared that he had given notice to all of  his workers making pantaloons and breeches, lest the Bill be passed. Astoundingly, given the raging framebreaking that had taken place over the last few months, he even went as far as to state there no misunderstandings between Hosiers and framework-knitters as to prices for work completed. Finally, Nelson stated that he was against any kind regulation, even in trades like silk, in which he played no part.

John Nixon, a master Hosier from Nottingham was called next. Nixon was another Hosier who presented that his business would be destroyed by regulation - he pointed out that he had thriving markets for goods that the proposed Bill would prohibit. Nixon also disputed that 'fraudulent goods' existed, using the same reasoning as Thomas Nelson - that there was a market because they were cheap. Nixon was also not above moral blackmail, threatening that he would dismiss 40-50 workers if the Bill became law.

John Parker - who had given evidence two days before - now returned to the Committee, and answered many largely technical questions put to him by a Committee member supporting the Bill.

Lastly, John Coltman, a Leicester Hosier was called before the Commitee. The line of questioning he was subjected to was similar to those before, which exposed where the sympathies of the Committee now lay: that regulation would snuff his large and extensive business, one which relied on foreign markets, which were just now opening again. Also like the other Hosiers, Coltman all but denied the existence of cut-ups and 'fraudulent' goods. His last line of evidence spoke volumes: "...we have great difficulty to contend with in the foreign market, if such stockings as these [i.e. cut-ups] can be sold at 3s. a pair ... if we cannot meet this in a foreign market by articles equally cheap, we have no chance".

11th July 1812: The Parliamentary Select Committee for the Framework-knitters Bill is reconvened

Following lobbying & petitions from Hosiers in Nottingham and Leicester, the Parliamentary Select Committee that had sat in April to consider evidence from Framework-knitters, was reconvened in July. Over the space of 3 days, the Committee heard evidence from a number of Hosiers.

On Saturday 11th July 1812, the Select Committee heard from two Hosiers. The first was John Parker, from Nottingham. He had general objections to the principal of legislating to regulate the trade: the committee pressed him on whether or not he felt his business would be affected by the proposed regulations, and though he admitted he felt it would not be, he went on to object to any kind of  constraint on any business. Parker openly admitted that he produced work that was offensive to his skilled workers, in that he confessed that none of the work he produced fell in with the schedule in the Bill proposed by the framework-knitters. Time and time again, Parker object to the 'trouble and inconvenience' the proposed Bill would put him to, even the 'trouble' of drafting a list of prices which were already commonly agreed by him and his workmen, and the Committee did manage to extract from him that he objected to written contracts of all kinds. But the Committee chose not to reflect back to him the testimony of the framework-knitters about the miserable, grinding poverty & distress they suffered because of his practices. They also accepted his viewpoint - that he felt he could not sell items made according to the proposed regulations, and therefore he would not. In general, the Committee did well to draw evidence from Parker which illustrated that he was the sort of Hosier the framework-knitters objected most to - in a tortuous exchange, it was clear that he knew or understood little if anything about what his workmen did or the machinery they used, let alone their concerns. Unsurprisingly but also astoundingly, Parker stated he was ignorant of the changes in his workmen's wages over the past 7 years. Despite Parker's testimony that the mysterious ways of the market had meant that the trade was suffering through a lack of demand, and his fortgetfulness about the wages he paid out, he confessed that he now employed 200 workmen, as opposed to 300 three years ago.

James Hooley, another Nottingham Hosier, was also examined on the same day. He laid the blame for the lack of trade down to the War, and denied that the production of shoddy goods even existed. Hooley painted a picture of his business which should have led the Committee to ponder how representative he was of the trade - he reported a booming trade in caps to be sold on the continent, and also a thriving trade for pantaloons, all of which he said would be impossible were the trade to be regulated. Hooley openly admitted to making cut-up gloves, but said he could not fulfil the demand for them, and he attributed the lack of demand for finely-mad items as being down to the whim of fashion. He also disputed that wages had fallen, but qualified this with if enough work could be found, which he admitted could not. Summing up, the Committee managed to extract from Hooley his view that if shoddy goods sold in the marketplace, he saw no reason not to sell them.

27th May 1812: Parliamentary Select Committee on the Framework-knitters Petitions is released

On Wednesday 27th May 1812, the Parliamentary Select Committee appointed to consider the petitions of the framework-knitters released their findings from the evidence they had heard and made recommendations.

The report was clear, as early as the third paragraph that 'nothing less than the interference of the Legislature will be competent'. It considered the Charter granted by King Charles the Second to the Framework-knitters in 1664 to be a 'dead letter', ignored by the hosiers and unenforced by the local authorities.

The report singled out the chief complaint of the framework-knitters the hearings had heard from - that of 'fraudulent work' made by poor practices - as the principal cause of the decline of the trade. The report recommended that single press lace, single cotton and single worsted and cut-ups be prohibited, along with the payment of truck or goods in lieu of wages.

The Committee was keen to underline that none of the witnesses had called for a regulation of wages and, in part contradictory to their calls for regulation, that 'trade must always be left to find its own level'. Similarly, the Committee was similarly sceptical about the value of regulating frame-rents, but did feel that greater transparency was necessary.

Finally, the Committee unhelpfully pointed out that only one Hosier had been prepared to give evidence, leaving the door open for them now to influence the progress of the Bill they had already recommended.

In just over 6 weeks time, Hosiers would become more involved before another Select Committee.

25th May 1812: A Hosier, James Tarratt, gives evidence before the Select Commitee into the Framework-knitters Petitions

Prior to Monday 25th May 1812, those giving evidence before the Parliamentary Select Committee into the Framework-knitters Petitions had been the Framework-knitters themselves. But five days after the Committee had last sat, a Hosier called James Tarratt gave evidence.

Tarratt was a lace manufacturer from Nottingham. He started his evidence by echoing the views of the Framework-knitters who had presented evidence earlier: that the manufacturer of single press lace had greatly injured the trade, and that although there was a difference in price between this form of lace and others, single press was effectively worthless after the first time it was washed as it lost shape. He advocated the prohibition of single press lace.He also took the framework-knitters line on cut-ups.

Tarratt also called for the prohibition of truck, and that a printed schedule of prices paid by the hosier should be displayed on each workplace, but agreed with the Committee that the prohibition of foreign trade was the 'principal cause' of the 'decay' of the trade.

22nd May 1812: Complaints from Nottingham are sent to Gravenor Henson in London

1812. May 22

Nottm.

Dear Friends,

I take this opportunity of informing you how very Clamourous the people are all Round the Country they say nether you nor Mr Smith mention a word about the Plain trade say your all Lace & plain Silk hands that There has been no proper evedence examined for the too Needle Branch I have been out too days and could not get one Peney they look Plesent as a Cows husband at me Swear they will not pay aney More—I have had a great Deal of trouble these too days on that account—3 Men came from Basford yesterday insisting I should imedeately go to London to see what you have done for them I told them there was the Money to colect from the Country I could liot be spared on that acount that I would write to you for they are not satisfied with what Mr Blackner and Mr Allin told them said you Neaver mentioned a word about their branch in your Letters—PS write to me by return of post or youl soon see me in London or else I must Run my Country—pleas Give my Respects to Mr Allsop Mr Large and Mr Latham—tell them I ham well satisfied with wat you have done for us and I will take Care you shall not want for Money think I can collect 20 or 30 pound next week no more at present from your constant Friend

Wm. Bowler.

[Addressed to] Mr. G. Henson . . . London.

21st May 1812: Gravenor Henson updates Nottingham about progress at the Select Committee in London

1812. May 21

London

Sir

I take this Opportunity of informing you that the Committee have closed the Evidence, and will make their Report on Monday; We have hopes that the Trade will be incorporated, the same as the Cutlers at Sheffield, or in other Words, the Charter will be ratify'd by Act of Parliament; You must endeavor by every means in your Power to raise a Sum of Money and send us whatever you can; Mr Toplis thinks we shall have to pay Mr Gurney the Short Hand Writer, You dole us Money out as though you was bestowing Alms, here we are at a great Expence, Paying Coach Hire for Witnesses Return, and  you send us Five Pound; If I had not Money of my Own in my Pocket, we should have been quite fast; I gave Ten Pound to Mr Toplis, 2=12=0 to Mr Green 1=11=6 to Mr Blackner and 1=11=6 to Mr Allen Besides paying 15 Shillings for my Lodging which Blackner and Columbell occupied—Latham and Large, I hope will be with you in the beginning of the Week; They cannot come down for want of Money, they mean to collect the Town and County—

One Person is sufficient to remain here when the Bill is in Parliament at least till the Third Reading—Why the Devil dont you send the Silk Stockings; are you asleep! Mr Keck leaves Town for Leicestershire to morrow and will not be in Town before the Kings Birth Day. Lord how negligent you are, If you cannot send all send some Damn the Trade they seem determined on their own Destruction: They are the most backward dilatory, unwilling to do good race of Men on Earth: Send if you can but I confidently hope they are now on the Road; Send them Blast them either send them or bum them, If they do not arrive instantly they will be of no use. If any Man in the Trade refuses to do his Duty in the making of Articles for the Recovery of his Trade Knock his Teeth down his Throat instantly.

I am Sir
Yours eternally
G. Henson

P.S. I have One Pound Ten Shillings left of my own Money.

[Addressed to] Mr. Thos. Roper . . . Nottingham.

20th May 1812: More witnessess give evidence before the Select Committee on the Framework-knitters Petitions

On Wednesday 20th May, two more witnesses gave evidence before the Parliamentary Select Committee on the Framework-knitters Petitions.

Gravenor Henson resumed giving evidence from the day before. Henson played to the gallery to the extent that he compared the English Trade with the French Trade, saying that the revolution had helped the trade in England because many frames there were destroyed as part of it, and also went on to insert nationalism into his evidence by stating that French knitters were inferior to English ones.

In addition, Henson spoke of the need for the regulation of frame-rents to a fixed percentage of their value, in order to drive out the speculators, and also the prohibition of single-press lace and two-course hole. He laid the blame for the diminution of trade squarely at the feet of the 'fraudulent' quality of work & bad practices.

John Wallbank, a framework-knitter from London was next to give evidence. He stated that he was in full agreement with all that Gravenor Henson had had to say, and noted that the fleecy hosiery trade in London could not compete with the articles being sent from Nottingham, which were being sold for such a low price, but were of totally inferior quality.

19th May 1812: Gravenor Henson gives evidence before the Select Committee into the Framework-knitters Petitions

On Tuesday 19th May, the Secretary of the United Committee of Framework-knitters, Gravenor Henson gave his first day of evidence before the Select Committee into the Framework-knitters Petitions.

Henson spoke first about plain work made from worsted or woollen yarn, and how the introduction of spinning machinery for worsted had meant that the thread was of an inferior quality, having inconsistencies in the thickness, which when used in knitting meant that the goods produced were simply not very strong and inferior in quality. Henson also spoke about plain cotton hosiery, and the profusion of cut-ups affecting quality, and also the use of cut-ups to make silk and cotton gloves.

Henson spoke in great detail about the trade and good and bad practices which he had seen decline and develop respectively.

16th May 1812: More evidence given at the Select Committee into the Framework-knitters Petitions

On Saturday 16th May 1812, more witnesses gave evidence at the Parliamentary Select Committee into the Framework-knitters Petitions.

Edward Allen, who had given evidence the previous day, was the first to appear, again speaking about payment of wages in goods. He stated that it was particularly common in Sutton-in-Ashfield, where the effective value of the goods was inflated, and that this was particularly common, and was not related to any supposed scarcity of coins.

Allen also spoke of 'Colts' (i.e. unapprenticed workers) and said that in the Midlands they now accounted for two-thirds of those at work in the trade.

Next up was John Collumbell, a framework-knitter from Derby, who gave evidence about the Plain Silk branch of the Trade. He made a strong plea for the introduction of regulation. Collumbell showed that many of the practices that the other branches of the trade complained of were widespread in the plain silk branch.

John Green was next, a Nottingham Framework-knitter of fifty years. Green spoke about the damage done to the trade by the adoption of single-press cotton lace, as had Thomas Large 3 days before: shoddy goods destroying the reputation of the trade.

The final witness on the 16th was Thomas Allsop, a member of the United Committee of Framework-knitters from Leicester, who had worked in the trade for 16 years in the plain cotton branch. He talked about Colting, and how the widespread adoption of it in Leicester had led many to flock to the trade, leading to shortages of labour in other occupations, but also to Colts training Colts.

15th May 1812: John Blackner & Edward Allen speak at the Select Committee into the Framework-knitters Petitions

On Friday 15th May 1812, two more framework-knitters gave evidence at the Parliamentary Select Committee into the Framework-knitters Petitions in London.

John Blackner had been a framework-knitter for 32 years. His longevity in the profession allowed him to speak in detail about his profession not juts over his working lifetime, but in that of his forefathers also. He reflected that the legislation that had protected the framework-knitters allowed trade to flourish, and conversely that 'innovations' (not necessarily technological ones) had been detrimental. Blackner described how, when the quality of the goods began to fall due to shoddy practices, "the hosiers began to appear more determined on gaining profit from the smaller quantity of goods sold", which then led to 'cut-ups' being introduced, further deteriorating quality. Blackner stated that the particular branch of the trade that he was describing, utilising two-needle netted frames, had seen the number of frames fall from 500 in 1795 to 'one or two' in 1812, and he  advocated the prohibition of cut-ups for making stockings.

Blackner went on to outline the damage that speculators had done to the trade - i.e. those unconnected with hosiery who had invested capital in frames in order purely to extract profit from renting them, leading to exploitation of the workmen. Again, Blackner believed that those unconnected with the trade should not be allowed to own frames.

Edward Allen next spoke to the Select Committee. He gave evidence about how it had become increasingly common to be paid in goods rather than in cash for work done, which had included 'grocery, such as soap, candles, bacon, tea, sugar', all of which was much less in value than equivalent in cash. Although this practice was illegal where the workman did not consent to it, Allen stated that the hosiers evaded the law by raising the rent on frames and compelling the workmen to buy goods from their warehouses at reduced prices.

14th May 1812: Thomas Latham at Framework-knitters Select Committee hearing

On Thursday 14th May Thomas Latham, another member of the United Committee of Framework-knitters, gave evidence before the Parliamentary Select Committee into the Framework-knitters Petitions.

Latham echoed Thomas Large's comments of the day before about why single press lace should be prohibited. But Latham also spoke of grievances in the plain silk trade: being forced to do 'coarse' work on too fine a gauge frame, resulting in lost income; hosiers reducing wages for 'deficiencies' in work that the framework-knitters can't do anything about. Latham advocated regulation to prevent these abuses.

Latham also spoke of the practice of 'truck' - i.e. wages paid in goods rather than cash. He cited one example of a framework-knitter who was owed £2, 8s, and was given cloth, buttons and other items which he could only sell for 10s & 6.

Latham was asked to talk about what he earned, and he told the committee it was presently 12s for a 6-day week, but that it had been as high as 18-20s up to 5 years ago, which he considered to be a fair wage.

Latham lay the blame on the production of bad or 'fraudulent' work, which had brought the trade into disrepute, and he noted that the retail price of the goods they were producing had not fallen as had the workmen's wages.

13th May 1812: Parliamentary Select Committee on the Framework-knitters Petition commences

On Wednesday 13th May, a Parliamentary Select Committee was convened at the Houses of Parliament in London to enquire into the state of the Framework-knitting trade, owing to the petitioning of Framework-knitters over the past few months. Framework-knitters, Hosiers and members of the United Committee of Framework-knitters would be interviewed by the Select Committee over the next 7 days.

The proceedings commenced by examining Thomas Large of the United Committee of Framework-knitters.

Large attested that he had been a framework-knitter for 17 years, and was occupied solely in the plain silk branch of the trade, exclusively concerned with making stockings and gloves. He earned between half a guinea to 15 shillings a week. He told the committee that in 1807, the trade had been flourishing, with 1200 frames in use, but the decline had been so great that only 150 frames were now employed.

He considered that the loss of trade was the cause of 'fraudulent goods' - principally single-press lace that had been looped once rather than twice, and lost its shape after washing. Agreements preventing the manufacture of such lace had been broken, and the 'fraud' came about when some manufacturers had sold the single-press lace as the best type available, extracting huge profits and deceiving the consumer. Large considered that these practices had wrecked the trade, and also commented on the effect that the trade blockades of the Orders in Council and the American Non-Intercourse Act had had on the trade, and felt that their existence had in fact heralded the new practices of the Hosiers. Large stated that he felt that the prohibition of the production of single-press lace would greatly benefit the trade and also advocated the regulation of frame-rents, and the limitation of frames for rent, even though this would mean those employed by the trade would diminish.

Large also spoke of the practice of Colting (i.e. employment of non-apprenticed labour).