Saturday 9 June 2012

An earlier Duke of Cambridge- Queen Victoria’s Commander-in-Chief -Part 1

Prince William, Duke of Cambridge is 30 on 21st June 2012. William went up to the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst in 2005 and was commissioned as a Lieutenant in the Blues and Royals on 15 December 2006. In this context it is timely to look back at the early military career of the last Duke of Cambridge, Prince George, who dominated the Victorian Military Establishment as Commander in Chief from 1856 to his retirement in 1895. When he became Duke of Cambridge in 1850 at the age of 31, Prince George had chalked up 12 years of service in the infantry and cavalry and reached the rank of Major-General.

 Conservative or Reformer?


To a certain extent the Duke of Cambridge was the link which connected the Army of Wellington to the Modern British Army. Accused by many of conservatism, he nevertheless worked with the civilian Secretaries of State for War, Sir Sidney Herbert, Lord Panmure and Lord Cardwell overseeing root and branch reforms to the Army.

After the death of the Duke of Wellington, and 37 years on from Waterloo the condition of the Army had become fairly dire. Whilst Inspecting General of Cavalry in 1852, Prince George’s reforming instincts started to emerge and his efforts were largely directed towards introducing order, not only to the cavalry but to the Army generally. It was chiefly due to his initiative that manoeuvres on a large scale were first carried out in England, as far back as the year before the Crimean War. He landed with the Army in the Crimea as General commanding a Division in 1854; and two years afterwards he became Commanding-in-Chief on the retirement of Lord Hardinge.

As Commander-in Chief he turned his attention towards reforming the system of Army Education and the inauguration of the Staff College was largely due to him. During the next decade his efforts were mainly directed towards preserving the Army from reduction in size following the end of the Crimean War 
The Duke was also known as ’The Soldier's Friend’. Whilst he was Commander-in-Chief, the pay of the soldier was considerably increased, largely owing to his repeated efforts. On 1 March 1860 the conditions under which men could earn Good Conduct pay were improved; and again, on 29 June 1867, an increase of two pence a day was made to the soldier's ordinary pay, and an additional sum of one penny a day was granted to all who re-engaged. As the stoppages for messing remained the same as before, the soldiers derived the full benefit of this increase.
On 20 September 1873, the scale of pay was once more revised. Beer money and the stoppages for bread and meat were abolished, the Secretary of State undertaking to furnish the Non-commissioned. Officer and the Private Soldier with a daily ration of one pound of bread and three-quarters of a pound of meat, in addition to his pay of one shilling a day.

Apparently, among the old long-service soldiers it was ever an article of faith that the Duke had obtained for them the extra two pence per diem in 1867 which was greatly appreciated.

Closely connected with the question of 'stoppages' of pay was the issue of ‘barrack damages.' In 1866, when giving evidence before the Royal Commission on the recruiting problem, the Duke expressed himself strongly on the question of barrack damages. He stated that ‘barrack damages' are a source of constant complaint. There was scarcely ever a change of quarters where some complaint did not arise out of ‘barrack damage.'

I think that fair wear and tear ought to be more liberally accepted than it is now ;and thus I think that if any little thing has been done which has rather improved than deteriorated the barrack, which is now considered as " barrack damage," it should be accepted as an improvement and not charged at all.'

The Soldier's lot was also vastly ameliorated during the Duke's command by the gradual increase in the clothing and equipment issued for free. In 1854 the Soldier had issued to him free of cost only the following articles full-dress coatee, his trousers, and one pair of boots annually. He had to pay for everything else he wore, besides providing himself with a knapsack, haversack, and leather stock. Gradually this was altered until the men were issued for free most of the outer clothing they required; and all their regimental necessaries.  

For a volunteer army the whole question of remuneration was of great importance to the men and the gradual increase in their disposal income by increasing basic pay, reducing stoppages and barrack charges and providing free equipment would have made a great difference to the men.

According to his Military Biographer, William Willoughby Cole Verner

“the views and ideals of his whole military life can best be summed up by saying that throughout he was perfectly 'straight'; and that his sole object was to do the best he could, according to his lights, not only for the particular units or individuals which composed the force he commanded, but for the general welfare, from a national point of view, of the great institution which he loved to describe as the King's Army.”

To understand the background to the Duke of Cambridge’s career, it is worth looking back to the very start.

Early Career


Prince George of Cambridge was born on 26th March 1819 in Hanover, where his father Prince Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge was Lieutenant Governor and later Viceroy. Prince George spent most of his early years in Hanover, until aged eleven he came to live with his uncle King William IV at Windsor Castle. His early years were spend in the care of Rev. Canon Wood who was responsible for his education and his youth involved a round of visits to Hanover, a keen interest in Field Sports and a slowly developing interest in matters military.

On 3rd November 1837, Prince George then aged 19 was gazetted to the rank of Brevet-Colonel in the British Army. Despite his rank, he subsequently went through a thorough and complete course of instruction in drill and military discipline. Gibraltar was decided upon as a suitable station where the young Prince  could acquire the first preliminaries to learning the duties of a soldier, in a Horse Guards letter of 29 September 1838 to the Governor of Gibraltar Sir Alexander Woodford, K.C.B., it was notified that

Her Majesty had been pleased to approve of Colonel H.R.H. Prince George of Cambridge being attached to the Garrison of Gibraltar and being employed in any manner in which the Governor may require H.R.H’s services.'

Prince George, accompanied by Lieut.-Colonel Cornwall, started on his journey to Gibraltar on 21 September 1838. On 24 September they embarked on the Falmouth steam packet, and after a rough passage arrived late on the evening of the 26th at Vigo. On the 28th the packet anchored in the Tagus, where a British Squadron was lying, and the Prince was taken ashore. At Lisbon he was entertained by the King and Queen of Portugal. Whilst there he set out on a battlefield tour of the Peninsular War, riding to Torres Vedras and then to battlefield at Rolica.
The party returned to Lisbon on 5 October, and on the 7th the Prince sailed in the Tagus steamer for Gibraltar where he arrived early on 9 October. 
Sir Alexander Woodford wrote to Prince George’s Father, the Duke of Cambridge;
“I am willing to persuade myself that the Prince is disposed to take interest in everything here, and I shall propose a plan whereby H.R.H. will get every information relative to the interior order of a regiment, and I shall also arrange for some drill and exercises with the 33rd Regiment. After that I propose that the Prince should take duty on the Field Officer's roster, and on field days 
I shall put the light companies of the five regiments together and give H.R.H. the command. ... I trust that all this, with what the Prince will see of daily routine of duty here, will give him much insight into everything connected with the service in general. I have selected an officer of Engineers who will give the Prince information upon that branch of the service, and I shall do the same for Artillery practice and Gunnery. ... I am certain that it will be very agreeable to the Duchess and to you, Sir, to hear that the Prince has pleased everybody here on his arrival by his good-humoured and unaffected manners. “
On 12 October 1838 Prince George commenced his military duties. In his diary he wrote 
'This morning I went for the first time to the barracks of the 33rd to be drilled. I am to be attached for the present to that regiment, and learn my duty with them. They are a very nice corps, and were the Duke of Wellington's own regiment in the East Indies. ‘
In his diary of 21 January 1833 the Prince wrote:

'The half-yearly inspection of the 33rd took place on the Neutral Ground, and in the afternoon I went with the General to examine the books of the Regiment.' 
On the 14th February he was placed in command of the 33rd Regiment at a Divisional Drill of two Brigades; subsequently he did Field-Officer's duty, and eventually 'Colonel of the Day* with the two Field-Officers under him. 
In April 1839, Prince George left Gibraltar for Malta and Sir Alexander wrote as follows: 

It has afforded me much pleasure to have H.R.H. here, and I feel persuaded that he has seen a great deal of life, and has heard a great deal of the opinions and sentiments of men of all ranks, which knowledge is always useful to a young man, and particularly to one so circumstanced as your son, Sir, and who is, moreover, a quick and apt observer.' 
Prince George landed at Malta on 90 April 1839, and remained there as the guest of His Excellency Lieutenant- General Sir H. P. Bouverie for about a fortnight. During his visit he accompanied the Governor on his half-yearly inspections of the various regiments quartered in the island, and on 16 May embarked in H.M.S. Hermes and sailed for Corfu. 
Returning home to Britain, through Greece and Italy, Prince George visited the Austrian Army Manoeuvres under Field-Marshal Count Radetzky. Colonel Cornwall reported that ' H.R.H. took much interest in the manoeuvres, and cannot have failed in deriving much improvement from them.' 
His experiences of the Austrian Military Manoeuvres in the autumn of 1839, when he witnessed the splendid squadrons of Austrian Cavalry in the field, possibly influenced his inclinations towards the cavalry and on 8 January 1840 he was attached to the 12th Lancers, and did duty with them for two months at Brighton, and subsequently in Dublin as a lieutenant-Colonel. On 25 April 1842 he was gazetted as Colonel of the 17th Lancers, then serving at Leeds. Whilst there he was actively engaged in suppressing the disturbances that took place that year in the manufacturing districts, receiving the thanks of the magistrates of Leeds 
On 20 April 1843 Lieutenant-Colonel and Brevet-Colonel Prince George was promoted to a substantive Colonelcy, and appointed Colonel on the Staff to command the garrison at Corfu 
On 7 May 1845 he was promoted to the rank of Major- General. On 1 October 1846, when in his twenty-seventh year, he was appointed to be a Major-General on the Staff and given the command of the troops at Limerick. After six months' experience of a mixed command at that station he was appointed, on 1 April 1847, to the command of the Dublin where he served his full period of five years, up to 31 March 1852. 
On 16 March 1850 Prince George of Cambridge was also appointed to be one of the Commissioners for the Royal Military College, Sandhurst, and also for the Royal Military Asylum, Chelsea. On 8 July 1850, upon the death of his father, Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge, he succeeded to his titles and dignities as 2nd Duke of Cambridge.
So on becoming Duke of Cambridge, the Duke had accumulated 12 years of varied military experience: including basic regimental duties with the infantry of the line, cavalry service, colonial service and experience of garrison command together with the study at close quarter’s continental military systems. 

References

The Military Life of HRH George, Duke of Cambridge
William Willoughby Cole Verner- London 1905

Monday 4 June 2012

The Development of the Army Clothing Factory Pimlico

The Royal Army Clothing Factory and Army Clothing Department at Pimlico

The Army Clothing Factory was established in Pimlico in 1857 to manufacture clothing for the Army and followed on from the successful introduction of the Army Clothing Department in 1855

Procurement of Army Clothing Prior to 1855

Prior to the formation of the Army Clothing Department, the clothing for the infantry and cavalry was supplied by the Colonels of the Regiments through their Regimental Agents. Each Colonel was allowed a certain annual amount for clothing and accoutrements for each man in the Regiment, a system known as “off reckoning”. For example for a Regiment of the Line, the Colonel received the following allowances:
Sergeant        £7        9s        2d
Corporal         £4        19s
Private            £2        6s
With regiments seldom being at their established strength and the prices of clothing items being considerably less than the allowances paid, there was clearly the scope for large profits for the Colonels. Although, there were instances where some Colonels had suffered heavy losses as a result of the system.
While the system led to potentially large profits for the Colonels, it led to extreme misery for the workers producing the garments. In his letter VII of 9th November 1849, Henry Mayhew considered the conditions of men and women manufacturing Government Contract clothing;
“Small as are the earnings of those who depend for their living upon the manufacture of ready-made clothes for the wholesale warehouses of the Minories and the adjoining places, still the incomings of those who manufacture the clothes of our soldiers and sailors,….even less calculated to support life. I thought the force of misery could no further go than with the waistcoat and shirt hands that I visited last week. And yet since then, I have seen people so overwhelmed in suffering, and so used to privations of the keenest kind, that they had almost forgotten to complain of them.”
Mayhew collected testimony from some of the workers involved in the trade. Firstly, he interviewed a man who made soldiers’ trousers. The man received 6d a pair making trousers for the Foot Guards band could make a pair in five hours ( although he reckoned that it would take a middling worker eight hours) He then sub- contracted the seams out. The worker told Mayhew he could make about three pairs a day- possibly four in summer by working very hard. Work was not always available. At the best of times when work was brisk, he earned about 8s a week – but then had to pay for the thread and cotton, for sub-contracting the seams and for delivery costs. All told that left him with 3s and 7d a week to live on. However, the work was very precarious – in the previous year he had had eight weeks with no work and in the fifteen works prior to the interview had only made 15 pairs of trousers. He was sure that his average net earnings were not more than 3s a week.
The worker received his work from a piece-master who got a penny profit for each garment. He believed that the low prices stemmed from the very low prices at which the contracts were taken out, he was convinced that
“If the Government would take it into their hands, and give the clothes out themselves, the poor work-people might have prices that would keep them from starving... “
According to his testimony, the workers generally involved in that type of contract work were generally “old persons who have seen better days, and have nothing left but their needle to keep them “. There were also “many widows with young children, and they give them the seams to do, and so to manage to prolong life, because they’re afeard to die, and too honest to steal.”
Mayhew also interviewed a woman making army and police uniforms who lived off Grays Inn Lane. Again, she estimated to earn about 1s and 6d a week from the trade. Her husband had been in hospital with inflammation of the lungs and was unable to work; she had been obliged to pawn his tools.
Mayhew quoted extensively from the 1833 Report from the Select Committee on Army and Navy Appointments and evidence presented to that Committee.
“It appears, then, that the army clothing in the year above alluded to cost, for 105 battalions of infantry, £255,000. The supply of this was entrusted to 105 Colonels, and they paid £192,000 for the goods, taking to themselves £63,000 of profit out of the transaction.”
So the pre 1855 system allowed Colonels to make large personal profits; did not represent good value for the public-purse; and left the workers in a state of poverty. Something, therefore, had to change.
While the above system prevailed for Regiments of the Line, other Corps of the Army was provided with clothes by the Ordinance Department. By a Royal Warrant of 6th June 1854, Colonels were granted a fixed allowance in lieu of the “off-reckoning”. Effectively, it was determined that the public should pay the army clothing suppliers through the Regimental Agents with the Colonels being removed from the equation. However, this system still gave the public no benefit from competition within the Garment Trade. Therefore Lord Palmerstsone's Government decided to supply all clothing by public contract with the War Office and the Army Clothing Department was established to supervise such activities.

Establishment of the Army Clothing Department

On 21st June 1855, a Royal Warrant relieved Colonels and Regimental Agents of all responsibilities associated with clothing. Captain Petrie’s “Strength, Composition and Organisation of the Army of Great Britain” published in 1864 describes the set up at Pimlico as being
The Factory Department- presided over by the Superintendent of the Royal Army Clothing Factory- responsible for manufacturing some Army clothing.
The Inspector’s Department- presided over by the Inspector of Army Clothing – where all materials and articles received from external contractors were examined by experts before being stored.
The Storekeeper’s Department- where the stores were kept ready for issue.
The first Director General of Army Clothing was Colonel Sir Thomas St Vincent Troubridge Bart. CB appointed on 7th June 1855. A career soldier, he had served in the 73rd and 7th (Royal Fusiliers) Regiments of Foot from 1834 to 1853 before being retired from active service as a result of wounds received. He was paid a salary of £1,000 per year.
He was ably assisted by his young Assistant Director General, the 27 year old George Dalhousie Ramsay. Despite his relative youth, Ramsay already had a distinguished public service career and had served as Private Secretary to no less than three Secretaries of State for War, the Rt. Hon. Fox Maule (from 1st October 1849 to January 1852), Rt. Hon. Sidney Herbert (from December 1852 to February 1855) and latterly Lord Panmure from February 1855 until he took on the role of Assistant Director General.. He was paid £800 a year.
On 1st July 1856, Ramsay gave evidence before the Select Committee on Public Contracts. He defined the role of the Army Clothing Department as:
·         To take charge of all patterns of clothing and appointments when they have been sanctioned by the Sovereign and sealed by order of the Secretary of State for War.
·         To receive all requisitions for clothing and appointments from the Adjutant-general for the Foot Guards, Cavalry and Infantry of the Line.
·         To examine the requisitions and to instruct the clothiers to comply with them within the time specified.
·         To carry on all correspondence relating to the clothing and appointments and to be the sole medium of communication with the selected suppliers.
·         To receive from the Inspecting Officers, the clothing inspected.
·         To receive all requisitions for great-coats and warm clothing and to ascertain that the regiment was entitled to the supply requisitioned.
At the time Ramsay gave his evidence before the Select Committee, the Army Clothing Department was in a transitional phase and was effectively grandfathering the previous arrangements and paying for existing contracts. The Department would take over is full responsibilities from 31st March 1857. From that date onwards, the inspection of clothing was to take place at Weedon where it would be “inspected by the Inspectors there, who are all practical men, and have a complete knowledge of the supplies which they are called upon to Inspect”.
The Inspectors all had a background in skilled trades or in the army which enable them to carry out their tasks. The 1st Inspector (Cloth) Mr H Hoile had a background of 10 years with the firm of Costaker & Co, Cloth Merchants and one year in Mr Bliss’s Cloth Factory. The other Inspector of Cloth, Mr. T Mallett had 10 years experience as a woollen salesman in Bartleets’s Cloth Hall, London and 2 years with Bull & Wilson’s, St Martin’s Lane, London.
Going forward, it was proposed that the Government would make the contracts for the cloth for the Infantry based on an open tender process and having procured the cloth, it was to be examined and tested by the Inspectors at Weedon and then further contracts would be issued for the making of the clothing.
Under examination by the Committee, Ramsay concurred that the idea was that the Army Clothing Department would supply the Army with infinitely better clothing than it had ever had before without any additional cost to the Public.

A False Start a Weedon


The original Army Clothing Depot had been established by Lord Panmure at Weedon in Northamptonshire. A large site had been owned by the Crown at Weedon since 1803 where the Royal Ordnance Depot and later a barracks had been established in 1855 the site had the attraction that the large barracks were unoccupied and suitable for conversion to storehouses. It was also accessible by railway and the Grand Junction Canal. At the time, both Troubridge and Ramsay had objected to basing the clothing depot at Weedon, due its distance from Head-Quarters and the consequent difficulty in carrying out inspections.
The movement of Stores from the Tower of London to Weedon commenced on 1st November 1855 and on 1st December 1855, Mr James Sutton Elliott was appointed as Principal Military Storekeeper at Weedon. In fact, the transfer to Weedon and had been precipitately exercised and the new clothing depot suffered from early teething troubles. When Elliott arrived he found the books and records were in some state of disarray and that he had insufficient staff to deal with everything. The problems were compounded as a result of the rapid expansion of the Army, resulting from the Indian Mutiny in 1857 and the China Expedition in 1860. In 1859, a Commission was established to “inquire into the State of the Store and Clothing Depots at Weedon, Woolwich and the Tower.”
The Commission looked into the state of affairs at Weedon and concluded that, “the general mode in which the business of the Weedon Establishment was conducted was far from satisfactory.”
The Commission apportioned some of the blame for the shortcomings at Weedon on the unfortunate Elliott, mainly as a result of his continued absences from the site. Some of these were undoubtedly justified due to the necessity of his attendance at the War Office or the Deport in Mark Lane (London). Although according to the Commission, there was also “too much reason to believe that much of the time during which he was absent was devoted to his private pleasures in neglect of his public duty.” The Commission acquitted Elliott of any dishonesty or deliberate intention to do wrong and in their opinion the main defects at Weedon were attributable to the War Office.
In a fairly damning indictment the Commissioners concluded:
·         It was a mistake to locate the clothing depot so far from London making it difficult from frequent visits by the Director-General and Assistant Director-General. (By the time the Commissioner reported this problem had been solved by re-locating the Depot to Pimlico).
·         It was a mistake to appoint the first head of the establishment at Weedon without any specific instructions as to its organization
·         It was a mistake to supply Elliott with insufficient staff when the Depot was established
·         It was a continuing mistake not to increase the staff in proportion to the work at Weedon and in accordance with Elliott’s frequent requests.
·         It was a mistake that, notwithstanding the distance from London, more frequent inspection visits were not carried out.
·         It was a mistake to have insufficient stores located at Weedon
·         It was the most serious mistake to have separate contracts for the cloth and making up the uniforms. This had led to double contracts, double correspondence, double transport costs and double inspection costs. (Again by the time the Commissioners reported, single contracts were being made for fully made up clothing.)
However, in some mitigation, the Commissioners did concede that:
“It must not, however, be forgotten that the operations of the Government clothing establishment have been carried on under considerable disadvantages. It was formed when the war with Russia was at its height, and encumbered, when peace was made, with a considerable quantity of returned stores, which, though not unserviceable, were rendered obsolete by alterations and improvements in the patterns. It was called upon to provide the clothing for 1858-9 for the troops despatched -to India (40,000) six months earlier than it would have been due if they had remained in Great Britain. Yet we are assured that no single instance occurred in which the embarkation of these troops as delayed for want of clothing. It had also to clothe 62,000 additional men added to the army, besides the 30,000 embodied militia. With all this strain upon the resources and energies of a new establishment, there can be no doubt in our opinion that the clothing as furnished to the army has very greatly improved in quality, and that this improvement is owing not only to the sealed patterns being better, but to the greater care taken in inspecting the clothing.”
The Commission concluded that the mission of the Clothing Department should be:
·         That the soldier shall be supplied with good clothing. They agreed that this has been done under the present system better than it ever was before.
·         That he shall be supplied with punctuality. This had not yet been done, but the causes of the failure in this respect were exceptional, and they saw no reason why it should not be accomplished by a Government establishment, as well as by a contractor nominated by a colonel.
·         That he shall be supplied at a reasonable cost to the public. Assuming that in this respect no substantial advantage has hitherto been gained.
·         That clothing, which is to be paid for by public money, and used for the public service, shall be furnished after fair competition by any respectable firms willing to contract for the supply.
So although, the new system had not commenced in outstanding fashion, it was generally adjudged to be better than that which had gone before. The Commissioners also dismissed claims that the Weedon experiment had caused heavy losses to the Public purse- more generally that it had not achieved the expected for savings.

Establishment of the Army Clothing Factory, Pimlico


So the clothing Depot moved back to Pimlico. Sir Thomas Troubridge was appointed Deputy Adjutant-General at Horse Guards and Captain Caffin succeeded him as Director of Stores and Clothing. Ramsay became Assistant Director of Stores and Clothing, but especially charged with the Clothing Department. The next step was for the Government to start manufacturing the clothing for the Army. Already, in 1857 a Government Factory was established at Woolwich to make clothing for the Royal Artillery and Engineers. This experimental system was extended to Regiments of the Line, since this produced impressive savings to the public purse it was decided to extend the system of direct manufacture by the Government and in 1862 the Army Clothing Factory at Grosvenor Gardens in Pimlico was established.

1864 Children’s Employment Commission Report on Pimlico

In 1864, the Second Report of the Commissioners, of the Children’s Employment Conditions reported on conditions at the Army Clothing Factory. It was a generally favourable report. The Inspector, Mr H W Lord commented that:
“Every facility was afforded me for visiting and obtaining information as to the practical working of this excellent institution; the arrangements adopted to secure the comfort and health of the workpeople seemed to have been very successful.”
The factory at Pimlico was described as consisting of a very large and lofty hall, with an arched roof of glass, and having two galleries, an upper and a lower one, round its four sides. Mr Lord was conducted on a tour of the facility by Captain Taylor, who had moved to Pimlico already having gained considerable experience at the government manufactory. On the occasion of Lord’s visit there were present 724 women, 5 were absent from sickness, and 25 from other causes, in most cases from their having to go to receive pensions or half-pay on that day: so large a number of absentees was considered as being exceedingly rare.
Very few of them were under 18 years of age, the youngest of all was 14, she and some three or four from that age to 16 made up trimmings.
It is found that they must be first rate sewers, before they are taught the use of the machine, in order that they may understand, whether the work brought to their machine is properly prepared for it.
In the department which made the Chacos  women were also employed, although it was really a kind of saddlers' or cobblers' work, and had previously been considered man's work ; but the men in that branch had proved so disreputable and disorderly, that Captain Taylor determined to try what women could do, and the result has been most successful. They made some 2,000 chacos a week.
The bulk of the work was carried on in the centre of the hall; where there were 58 machines, each having 8 persons, besides the machinist, preparing or finishing the garments. At the time of the inspection nothing but great coats were being made, at the rate of 4,000 a week. In the previous January 28,578 new tunics, great-coats, jackets, and trousers were made on the premises.
All the sewing machines on the ground floor were moved by steam power, communicated by straps from horizontal shafting; the shafts pass along the floor, and are securely boxed; there was at first a difficulty in regulating the speed, but that is managed by a small wheel, which tightens or slackens the straps as required, and is applied by the pressure of the foot of the machinist on a pedal.
Nearly 450 persons were still directly employed out of doors; the names in the book of one viewer are 200, and in the other 230; some of these have one or two members of their family to help them, so that perhaps a thousand were employed altogether,
The hours were from 7.30 A.m. to 6.15 P.m., with an hour for dinner from 11.45 to 12.45; all the women left the premises for that meal; on rainy days 20 or 30 of those who live at any distance usually ask and are allowed to stay, the rest manage to go with one of those who live near. They had about 15 minutes for tea, which was taken on the premises; they paid Id. to an eating-house keeper, who is allowed the use of a room and range for preparing tea...
Interestingly, Captain Taylor remarked that it would no doubt be much easier to give out material for 100 garments to a responsible piece-master, and look only to him to have them returned properly made ; however,  he thought that "the workpeople are "much more ready to serve us now that we employ "them directly. They happen to be working hard "to-day, because it is the last day of our week; they "will get through as much to-day as they will all "to-morrow and the next day."
Captain Taylor was also confident that there was a wonderful difference observable in the improved physical condition of the people, after they had been working for a month or two at the Depot, and that the example set them there, contributed much to raise the tone of the whole neighbourhood.
It was necessary to be very careful about the character of the women; every one filled in a form and brought a reference, signed by a clergyman and a householder. Captain Taylor commented that:
“My own experience has convinced me that in order to manage a "number of women you must treat them kindly and "firmly, give them work enough, but never have even the appearance of making distinctions and "favourites."
There were separate water-closets for the women; places for washing, and apparatus; and a room for their bonnets and cloaks: all the women were divided into sections, each had a number, and a peg with a corresponding number in the partitions appropriated to their section. They were issued with a uniform.
According to Mr Lord’s report:
“There seemed a general conviction that the workpeople are better off, both as regards their earnings and their habits and health, than when they worked for contractors, while at the same time the Government saves money; in one single article, the tunic, the contractor's price has been reduced from 18s. 6d. to 15s. lid. “
Mr Lord also took testimony from some of the workers, which showed how things had moved on since Mayhew’s day;
“I worked for an army contractor before I came here. There were above 50 there. I earned about 14sa week there; here I have a little more, 15s. but we are never after time here ; we worked for a whole week sometimes there from 8.30 a.m. to 10 p.m., and once all night through. The workroom was very hot, for the pressing was done and the irons heated in the same room where all the people were; the machine-room had a very low ceiling.
“I worked for another contractor; there were about as many there as (the last witness) says there were where she was, none under 15, and very few under 17; the room was cool enough, for it was in the rafters and very draughty ; we used to suffer very much from tooth-ache and face-ache. Our hours were from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m.; but I have stayed many a time till 11 p.m., several nights a week for months, and never had any meal after our tea at 5 p.m. We used to get very tired. That was a year or two ago.”

1871 Factory Inspector’s Report on Pimlico

An 1871 Factory Inspector’s Report describes the Army Clothing Factory in similarly glowing terms. In the context of a previous discussion of the model factory at Saltaire, the report by Alexander Redgrave describes the factory in the following terms.
“I would however notice upon the present occasion, an establishment of much less pretention, but in many respects one of the most remarkable factories in the country.
It is of a, totally different kind from those grand establishments upon which money has been lavishly spent by a merchant prince. It is an establishment the supreme authority of which canvasses every item that is proposed to be expended —which enters into competition with old customs and confirmed habits—-which is open to the sharpest criticism of competing manufactures and of taxpayers, and which can have no secrets of management, or manufacture,—I refer to the Royal Clothing Factory, at Pimlico. “
Redgrave describes the principle aim of the Factory as “ getting the most for your money,” and that  everything had to show that clothes made in a Government establishment could be produced better and cheaper than by public competition; no easy task considering the notoriously low wages in the sector.
According to Redgrave’s report, the cloth, flannel, linings, etc received from the merchants or manufacturers had to be duly tested, and then passed on upon requisition to the clothing factory, which had to answer in clothes and waste for the cloth received.
The clothing of the army was a task which required no small amount of organization since in the small but important details, the buttons, braids, stripes and so forth, the uniform of almost every regiment differed. Even within a regiment, the band, the drummers, the sergeants, and corporals all had distinctive uniforms, with different braids etc. The factory had to keep in store about 900 patterns for articles used in regimental uniforms. All the minutiae were manufactured elsewhere and put together on the uniforms at the Pimlico Factory.
Redgrave describes the improved working conditions in the factory
“Those who have ever been in a tailor’s workroom know that the evils of overcrowding which are found there are increased a thousand fold by the coke stove which is always hot, always reeking, for keeping the irons warm which are constantly in use to press the seams; it will also have been remarked that the ironing the seams (which require a pressure of about 200 lbs.) is no light work.
At Pimlico the irons are arranged in the upper western floor or gallery. They are all heated by gas jets, with pipes to carry off the heated air. They are suspended over the ironing boards, and are weighted. When a seam is to be ironed it 'is placed upon the board, the tailoress presses a pedal with her foot, which raises the ironing board, and at the same time allows the iron to descend. The iron is simply guided by the hand, and the necessary pressure is obtained by the foot at the least expenditure of the strength of the tailoress.
The ironing room is as healthy and as well ventilated as any part of the establishment.”
In common with Mr Lord’s earlier report, Redgrave’s report comments on the good overall conditions at Pimlico.
“The hours; of work at the Pimlico establishment are much within the “factory hours," and however much the department has been pressed, the hours have never exceeded 60 per week.”
Again Redgrave attests to the huge improvement in conditions compared to the contract system. :
“One cannot help feeling what an enormous amount of happiness this establishment has promoted in rescuing hundreds of women from the miseries and trammels of the contract system, under which they starved for so many years.
His report concludes:
“The preceding facts have been gleaned during inspections I have made in the course of my duties, and while I beg to acknowledge the courtesy and frankness of Col. Hudson in explaining in every detail, the economy and management of the establishment under his charge, I must also bear testimony to his success in fulfilling to the letter the regulations of the Factory Acts.”

Conclusion

So in a period of some 20 years from when Mayhew had written, the provision of Army Clothing had changed beyond recognition. After a false start at Weedon, a centralised Government department now controlled both procurement and manufacture; the private profits of the Colonels had been removed; the costs of providing Army Clothing to the Public purse had been reduced and seemingly the conditions of the workers had been improved.
The Army Clothing Depot at Pimlico closed in 1933 and was demolished. It has now been replaced by the prestigious residential complex of Dolphin Square which still stands overlooking the River Thames in Pimlico.

References

The Unknown Mayhew- Selections from the Morning Chronicle 1849-1850
Annals of British Legislation 1859
Strength, Composition and Organisation of the Army of Great Britain- 1864
The Military \forces of the Crown- Charles M. Clode -1869
Reports of the Inspectors of Factories – February 1871

Sunday 6 May 2012

The Carving of figureheads

The Carving of figureheads

The reopened Cutty Sark at Greenwich contains a collection of Merchant ships figureheads assembled by London Businessman Sydney Chambers.

http://www.rmg.co.uk/cuttysark/history-and-collections/collections/figureheads

In his letter LXVIII to the Morning Chronicle of 5th September 1850, the renowned Victorian researcher Henry Mayhew, who was carrying out an investigation into London Trades, published an account of specialist woodworkers, in the ship and boat building trade. This letter contains an interview with a carver of Ships’ figureheads, which gives a brief, if fascinating, insight into the labour behind some of these figureheads.

The carving of figureheads is a distinct branch of the business of ship-building. In some yards this carving, as at present pursued, partakes more and more of the characteristics of a fine art, and all in all it is less rude than it was. The monstrosities, the merely grim and grotesque, which delighted the seaman of the past age, are now almost entirely things of the past. In the figure-heads of the meanest vessels now built, some observance of truth and nature is displayed. The figure-head is ordered of the carver for the general trade (the greater builders usually comprising that department as well as others in their own establishments). Sometimes he works from a drawing – rarely from a model. A carver upon whom I called had a spacious workshop in the corner of a large garden, immediately behind his dwelling house, which was near the Thames. Ranged alongside the wall, at the top of the garden, were a row of colossal and semi-colossal figureheads, exceedingly grim and sultry, and seeming singularly out of place, for they loomed down, with their unmistakeable sea-faring look, upon the white and orange lilies, the many tainted sweet peas and carnations , and the red and white roses. The figures were all of elm and each had a preliminary coat of paint of a dull brick colour, to prevent the wood from cracking, so that their uniformity of hue added to the curious effect that they presented. It was easy enough to recognise the figures or rather the approximation to the features, of the Queen, Prince Albert, and the Duke of Wellington; though there were several countenances that looked familiar enough, and yet puzzled the memory as to whose effigy was represented. Some figure-heads were robed, and starred, and coroneted, and some had the plain coats of the present day. With these were mingled female forms, some with braided hair, others with very rigid ringlets, carved out of solid wood…

Along the wall of the workshop were the same array of effigies, while in one corner , amidst heaped up timber , was a covered figure in a sitting position, which was much more elaborately worked than the others. A cornucopia rested on its left arm, while the other grasped a snake, the head of which had been broken off, and lay close by. The carving of the thick curly hair, was minute, and showed great painstaking. This, I found, was at one time a choice ornament of the Lord Mayor’s state barge, and represented Africa. An opposite figure, allegorical of another quarter of the world , I was told became rotten and had to be removed from the barge, and Africa was removed at the same time or she would have appeared isolated. When deposited in its present place the figure was gilt, but a great part of the gilding having been rubbed or fallen off, its new owner had it painted all over to resemble the others…

A muscular, hearty, and hale-looking young man , whom I found at work in the shop , presenting many of the characteristics of the one I have more particularly described , but not the same gave me the following information.:

‘ I was apprenticed to Mr- , and have never left London. My father was connected with shipbuilding, and so put me to this branch. I’m unmarried, and live with my friends. I have nothing to complain of in the way of business, as I have pretty good employment. We all drink beer- some of us perhaps, too much, but nothing compared to other trades. Ours is hard work, but we don’t drink much at work. Look you here, sir, this log of ellum, with just the sides taken off by the sawyers to make it square, has to be made into a “head”- into a foreign nobleman or prince, - I don’t remember his name, but it’s a queer one. To do that is heavy lifting and hard work. None of these fellows (pointing to the figures) here is proper size, hardly big enough, or I could easily gouge this one now into a lord. We first axe the log into a rough shape, a sort of outline, and then finish it with chisels and gouges. I sometimes work from a drawing, but mostly out of my own head, and direct myself by my eye. We have nothing to do with painting or gilding the heads. They’re sent home in their woods, just with a coat of paint over them to prevent them from cracking. Yes, you’re right, sir, that head will do for the Queen; but if a Queen isn’t wanted, and it’s the proper size, I can soon make her into any other female. Or she might do for a “Mary Anne”, without altering certainly she might The way the hair’s carved is the Queen’s style , and has been in fashion these eight or ten years. Ringlets ain’t easy particularly cork-screw ringlets as they’re called. The watch-chain and seals to a gentleman ain’t easy, as you have to bring out that part and cut away from it. The same with buttons and stars. Perhaps we aren’t as good at legs as at other carving. We generally carve only to the knee. The shipwrights place our work on the ship’s kneecaps. We have no Slop-workers amongst us; but there are two men who keeps a look out at the docks for broken heads, or heads damaged in any way, and offer to repair them cheap. They’re not workers themselves, but they get hold of any drunken carpenter, or any ship carver that happens to be hard up and out of work, and put them to the job at very low prices. But the thing don’t satisfy, and they do very little; still, it’s a break in upon us. I make 24s to 30S a week the year through, oftener nearer 30s. than 24 s; I make 36s at full work…..”

Friday 4 May 2012

The birth of European Air Routes

I have a particular professional interest in business travel and travellers, I am also a frequent user of Ryanair and Easyjet, so was particularly interested to come across an article on the early days of European air travel. Anybody who has ever found themselves waiting for a low cost flight at one of Europe’s smaller airports, for example Trieste, Malmo, Bristol, Krakow might be interested in an earlier , more glamorous era of European air travel when rather than being weekend destinations, these airports were vital parts of a new and increasingly integrated network of European Air Routes. A 1933 edition of Flight Magazine published a report on the 13th Bi-annual meeting of the International Air Traffic Association held in London on 27th and 28th September 1933. By 1933, nearly 800 aircraft were in operation in Europe with about 150 continental cities connected by air. The 1933 meeting was attended by representatives of 30 airlines from 15 countries.

Many of these airlines or their successors are still around today, while others have merged with onetime rivals or passed into the mists and oblivion of history. Delegates at the meeting included representatives from: AB Aerotransport ( Sweden); AEI (Italy); Aero  O/Y (Finland); Air France; Avio Linee Italiane; CLS ( Czechoslovakia); CSA Czechoslovakia; Der Danske Luft ( Denmark); Deru-Luft ( Germany- Russia) ; DLH ( Germany) ; Imperial Airways (Great Britain); KLM ( Netherlands); LAPE ( Spain); Navigazione Italiana (Italy); Norske Luftruker ( Norway) ; Osterreichse Luftkevehr ( Austria) ; LOT (Poland); SABENA ( Belgium) ; SAM (Italy); SISA (Italy)  and Swissair.

To some extent, the consolidation of the European Airline Industry was already well under way in 1933. In France, the five principal airline companies Air Union; Farman, CIDNA , Air Orient and the Compagnie Aerospatiale had been amalgamated to form Air France. Together these airlines had operated air routes which linked France with North Africa, Turkey, Sweden, Saigon and South America. As a corporate restructuring, the creation of Air France led to cost savings across the board; with a reduction in back-office administrative posts; transfer of personnel and a more productive use of equipment. The French state was, therefore, able to reduce its annual subsidy from 180 million to 155 million Francs.

By 1933 Air France was operating services such as London-Cannes ( via Paris) ; London – Marseilles ( via Paris and Lyons); ; Paris- Berlin ( via Cologne) and various routes from Paris to Central Europe , including Prague, Warsaw , Vienna , Budapest , Belgrade and Sofia. A weekly service operated from London to Saigon leaving London on a Wednesday evening and arriving Saigon on the following Thursday.

Deutsche Lufthansa (which again was born in an amalgamation of various German airlines in 1926) maintained a comprehensive network of routes across Germany and beyond. Key routes included; Berlin-Hannover- Amsterdam-Rotterdam-London; Berlin-Stettin-Danzig-Konigsberg. There was even an early spot of code-sharing going on the following routes were run in conjunction with other airlines. Berlin-Cologne-Paris ( with Air France) ; Berlin-Copenhagen-Malmo ( in conjunction with Den Danske Luft) and Munich-Innsbruck- Bolzano- Trento- Milano ( with Avio Linee Italiane) . An early example of a commuter shuttle was the “Aerobus” which ran three times daily between Frankfurt and Cologne. Lufthansa also ran connecting services from Berlin to Fredrichshafen where the airship Graf Zeppekin commenced the epic route Frederichshafen- Pernabuco- Rio de Janeiro- Montevideo- Buenos Aires- Bolivia- Chile.

Although Britain’s Imperial Airways was a member of IATA, as with most things Britain’s air routes remained firmly focussed on Imperial Routes. Despite this, by the 1930s there was a growth in internal air routes in Great Britain. Such routes included Blackpool- Liverpool; Bristol-Cardiff; Hull-Grimsby. By 1933 the following British cities had licensed aerodromes; Blackpool, Bristol, Cardiff, Hull, Inverness, Ipswich, Leeds-Bradford, Liverpool, Manchester, Norwich, Nottingham, Plymouth, Portsmouth, Renfrew, Stoke and Southampton.

Also in 1933 Schipol in the Netherland was serving as a major hub for KLM with connecting flights to other parts of Europe in connection with Sabena, Lufthansa, AB- Aerpotransport and Air France. The direct flight from Croydon to Amsterdam took about 2 1./2 hours across the North Sea. Since 1931, the Dutch had operated the longest air service in the world from Amsterdam-Schipol to the Dutch East Indies.

In 1933, Italian Airlines remained fragmented with six major companies. SISA based in Trieste ran services down the Eastern side of the Adriatic to Zara, Durazzo, Brindisi, Fiume and Venice. SAM based in Rome ran flights to France and across the Mediterranean to Libya where services linked up with SAN which ran between Tripoli and Benghazi and Benghazi and Tobruk. SAM also ran routes from Rome to Sardinia ans Sicily. AEI ran routes to Eastern Europe including Brindisi-Athens-Istanbul and Brindisi-Athens-Rome. Finally SA Avio line ran routes from Northern Italy to Germany. In 1934 all of the above with the exception of Avio Linee were amalgamated to form Ala Littoria as a consolidated national carrier.

In 1933 Belgium’s Sabena was able to make the happy claim that they had operated for none years without accidents to passengers or freight. .Possibly this was because they mainly ran short cross channel hops between London and the Belgian coastal resorts. Despite its small size, Czechoslovakia had two airlines the state run CSA operated routes between Prague, Brno , Bratislava and Zagreb, while CLS operated Prague-Dresden-Berlin and Prague to Amsterdam ( via Halle, Leipzig and Mulheim).  Poland’s state subsidized LOT operated routes from Warsaw to the Balkans and Warsaw to Danzig.

Greece by virtue of its position on the edge of Europe found itself as an important centre for aviation. Among those airlines passing through or over Greece, were Imperial Airways on the way to India and South Africa; KLM on the Amsterdam-Batavia route; the French Air Orient Co on its routes from Marseilles to Indo-China and AEI on its routes to Istanbul and Rhodes. In addition Lufthansa, Air France, LOT and SAM ran services from Northern Europe to Salonika. Due to its fragmented topography of islands and mountains, Greece was peculiarly unsuited to rail travel. The 200 mile trip from Athens to Salonika took at least 12 hours by train, 20 hours by sea and only 2 hours by air. By 1932 the Greek Airline EEES was carrying 7,892 passengers a year and understandably looking to expand its routes to the Greek islands.

Spain was lagging behind the rest of Europe. Although French postal routes to South America and Northern Africa traversed Spain, along with the Zeppelin routes to Brazil, there was negligible development of internal air travel in Spain. By 1933 only one company was operating Linea Aereas Postales Easpanoles, running daily services from Madrid to Barcelona and Madrid to Seville and back.

Finally to conclude this brief tour with the Northern Edge of Europe, air travel was developing slowly in Scandinavia. DDL operated a service between Copenhagen and Malmo. In Finland, Aero O/Y in conjunction with Swedish Aerotransport operated a regular service between Helsinki and Stockholm and the short hop between Helsinki and Tallinn.

So looking back, many of those aging terminal buildings which have recently been expanded and spruced up to acts as hubs for new low cost airlines and as new destinations for weekend breaks were vital parts of a rapidly expanding European air network over 80 years ago.

Introduction

I studied history at university, My professional interests are in taxation and in particular taxation relating to expatriates and internatonal executives. I want to use this blog to post on the historical background to some of the professional issues I come across and also on matters of general historical interest which I think might be interesting to talk about.