AND ON THE CONTINENT.

53

All this changed witli the end of the war and the beginning ofinternational competition. The change was not merely a directtransition to the power-lootn, but employers of hand weavers withplenty of capital built spinning mills, and spinners became at thesame time employers of hand weavers. Especiallywas the latter often the case, because the in-

creasingly unstable payments of the small manufacturersled the spinners to give out the yarns themselves.

These were the persons who at that time drew large profits fromthe so-called elasticity of the cottage industry, and who, accordingto the state of trade, sold the yarns or got them woven. Therichest in capital amongst them began gradually to build, inaddition to their spinning mills, sheds for power-looms (38).

The first owners of power-looms made, like the first spinners,tremendous profits; as power weaving mills became general,prices as well as profits rapidly declined. On a piece of calico,for instance, 28 in. wide, 5-J-lb. weight, ordinary quality, therewas in 1829 still a sum of 5s. for the cost of production and profit,in 1833 only 3s. (39).

Only after 1820 did the power-loom make more importantprogress. But in spite of this there were still in 1830 only about50,000 to 80,000 (40) power-looms, against 250,000 hand-looms.With the power-loom, also, the replacement of labour by themachine developed much more slowly than in spinning.

As long as the sizing of the warp had to be accomplished byhand during the weaving the application of the power-loom wasscarcely an advantage. An alteration was for the first timeeffected by the invention of sizing and dressing machines. Fromthat time weaving could go on without a break, and one weavercould mind two looms. It does not appear that more loomswere anywhere at that time tended by one weaver. The increaseof production by the power-loom was also not very important.

38. Ure: “Cotton Manufacture,” II., p. 430. Committee on Manu-factures (9,161, 9,280).

39. Committee-on Manufactures (9,171-95)

40. According to Porter, 50,500; according to Ellison, 80,000 in the year1829, and about 100,000 as early as 1833. Compare Baines, p. 236, where hegives the above number for hand-looms. Compare Committee on Manu-factures (9,449) ; Committee on Handloom Weavers, 1834 and 1835 (371-4).The total number of all hand-weavers is given as one million.