THE INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT
OF SOUTH WALES
1750-1850
AN ESSAY
by A. H. JOHN, B.Sc. (Econ.), Ph.D.
Lecturer in Economic History
The London School of Economics and
Political Science
University of London.
CARDIFF UNIVERSITY OF WALES PRESS
1950
Excerpts on
tramroad development from pp 144 - 146
In
1750, much of the coal was still brought out of the levels in wheelbarrows, and
transported from the colliery to the ports in carts or, where the roads were
exceptionally bad, in horse panniers. The first waggon, way was laid down about
this time at Neath by Sir Humphrey Mackworth, but his example was not followed
by other coal masters for several decades. In 1756, he constructed what was
probably the first tramroad in Wales. The whole line ran from the coalface to
the quay side, a distance of nearly a mile and a half, 1200 yards of which was
underground. At each wall of coal he employed three cutters and four waggoners,
who needed "great skill to keep the waggons on the rails through the
turnings and windings underground which are so intricate and do so greatly vary
in every street of coal that a good waggoner in one street will not serve in
another; and the work is so laborious that few men will undertake it."4
Each waggon contained almost a ton of coal. When finally he was imitated by
other large coalmasters in the neighbourhood, the waggons appear to be of a
smaller size, for in the accounts of the Briton Ferry Collieries in 1775 there
are to be found entries which refer to " extra allowances " to the drammar
" boys. The employment of juvenile labour would imply a small waggon more
suitable to their strength. In 1776, some five years after Richard Reynolds
first used iron rails, Lockwood and Morris, coalmasters in the neighbourhood of
Swansea, ordered one hundred tons of cast-iron plates, each 4 ft. long and 5
ins. wide, weighing 56 lbs., from the Coalbrookdale Ironworks, and it was
stated that " by 1788 there were about 240 tons of cast-iron tramroad
plates underground at Landore Colliery."5 It is not known when
iron rails appeared in the northeastern part of the coalfield, but the problem
of carriage from the levels to the works was partially solved at Cyfarthfa by
improvising a canal between the level mouth and the coal bank near the furnace.6
With the increased output of the puddling forges, tramroads above and below
ground rapidly became general at most collieries of any size. It was estimated
in 1811 that 150 miles of tramroads had been built in Glamorgan, Monmouthshire,
and Carmarthenshire, to serve the iron, copper and coal industries. In
addition, many miles of tramroad were laid down solely for the purpose of
conveying coal by means of a system of inclined planes to the adjacent canals.
It
is hardly necessary to emphasise the importance
of coal and metallurgical tramroads in the development
of railways. As early as 1804, Trevethick had experimented
at Merthyr; Gurney's steam carriage was tried at
Hirwaun in 1830, and in the same year a
rack-and-pinion locomotive built by the Neath Abbey
Foundry was tried at Penydarren.7
The same firm supplied Thomas Powell in 1830 with
the first locomotive used in hauling coal. This
engine, on its first trial, drew 50-1/2 tons of
coal from the Blaencyffin Isha Colliery to Newport
and the empty waggons back to the colliery, a distance
of 30 miles, in twelve hours after being delayed,
it was stated, for three hours by horse waggons.
It accomplished in one day work which took six horses
two days to perform, thus very considerably reducing
transport costs.8
4. G. G. Francis: Neatb
and its Abbey (Swansea, 1845)
5. W. H. Jones : The
Port of Swansea
(Carmarthen, 1922.).
6 N.L.W. : Crawshay
Deeds, Box 4, No. 2.
7. The Cambrian, 25 February, 1804 and
zo March, 1830.
8. The Cambrian, 31 July, 1830.
Excerpts on Iron
Making from pp. 153 - 157
In
the iron industry the influence of cheap coal and ore was as important as in
copper smelting, if less apparent. Unlike the latter industry, however, it was
most significant in the postsmelting stage, where it permitted the extensive
development of a process in which there occurred considerable wastage. Situated
at the head of a valley, where there was sufficient water power to drive the
machinery, the blast furnaces were usually built against the face of the hill
so that by the use of terraces they could be easily filled.3 This
arrangement also enabled the kilns for the calcining or " roasting "
of ores to be placed immediately behind, and level with, the tops of the blast
furnace. These kilns were made in the form of cylinders, six feet high, set
upon inverted cones about four feet high; the calcined ore was drawn through a
door set in the side of the cylindrical part of the kiln. On the same terrace,
too, were the heaps of limestone and coke. At a lower level, and in front of
the furnaces, were the remainder of the works, the refineries, forges and
mills.
É
Much had been accomplished in increasing the size of the furnaces since the
beginning of the century: an expanding market had enabled the economies of large
production to be exploited, as they were further to be exploited in the decades
following 1827. In this respect the iron industry differed from the copper
industry where technical considerations prevented much development in the size
of the furnace. The expansion was facilitated by a steady improvement in
technical knowledge and in blast-furnace practice. The use of large cinders,
discovered by Anthony Hill of Plymouth Works in 1811, the introduction of
haematitc ores, and the use of the hot blast, contributed in varying degrees to
increasing the output of the smelting operation. In addition, Hill improved the
iron by remedying its tendency towards being " red shot."
In
1800, most of the furnaces in Glamorgan were turning out 1100 - 1250 tons of
pig iron a year, although some exceptionally large ones erected at Cyfarthfa
Works in 1794-5 had a capacity of 1800 - 2200 tons. This latter figure became a
common make for the coke furnaces in the north-cast of the coalfield in the
first decades of the next century, though the output of the furnaces in the
western part of Glamorgan was probably smaller. In 1813, the furnaces at
Cyfarthfa were yielding 60-70 tons of pig-iron weekly,4 a make which
by 1820 was fairly common in most ironworks in the neighbourhood ; and the 8o
tons obtained at the Dowlais and Plymouth Works in 1827 became the average
blast furnace yield in the two following decades.5 At Dowlais in
1844, the fifteen furnaces averaged 801 tons a week for the 52 weeks and, in
the boom of the following year, the weekly output was pushed up to 94-2/5 tons.
At the Rhymney Ironworks, the weekly average yield for the 52 weeks in 1846 was
93-2/5 tons and in the following year 106-2/5 tons."5 Thus at
the middle of the century furnaces on the bituminous coals in the eastern parts
of the coalfield were producing ninety to a hundred tons of pig-iron weekly,
almost twice the output of the blast-furnaces situated further west which used
anthracite or semi-anthracite coal. The double impetus of competition from the
Scottish iron industry and the size of the market for railway iron had induced,
and continued to induce, the iron masters to increase the size of their
furnaces, and in 1857 so great had been the advance that the President of the
South Wales Institute of Civil Engineers was able to state " not so many
years since 120 tons a week was considered a good work for a blast furnace, now
200 tons is a common make, and we are looking forward to 300 tons as the next
step in this direction.6
Apart
from the economic advantages of increasing the size of the blast-furnace, there
were also several technical reasons why such furnaces were larger in South
Wales than in the Midlands. There was first the difference of products: for as
most of the iron in the Midlands was destined for the foundry, a higher quality
pig-iron was necessary, and this could be obtained only from smaller and more
manageable furnaces. In South Wales on the other hand, as most of the metal was
used in making bars and rails, the pig-iron underwent a refining process in
which there was considerable loss. It was, therefore, desirable to obtain as
large a smelting product as possible. Secondly, the development of large
furnaces in the Midlands was hampered because Staffordshire coal produced a
soft coke which crushed under a heavy burden, and thus obstructed the passage
of air through the furnace. To some extent this was obviated by obtaining hard
coke from other districts, but nevertheless the extra cost involved acted as a
deterrent in the building of such furnaces.7
Side
by side with the increase in the size of the blast-furnace went a great
reduction in the amount of coal used to produce a ton of iron. At the Dowlais
Works in 1791, for example, some eight tons were required for this purpose, but
forty years later the equivalent amount was three and a quarter tons, including
coal for the engines, the lime and ore kilns.8 Efforts were also
made in other directions to reduce costs by fuel economy. At the end of the thirties
a number of ironmasters in the neighbourhood of Merthyr, especially those using
semi-bituminous coal, found that by enlarging the "throat" of their
furnaces they could use raw coal, or half coal and half coke.9
Experiments were also carried out at the Ebbw Vale, Abersychan and Aberdare
Works in the use of blast-furnace gases for heating purposes, especially in
connection with the boilers of the blowing engines, but these were eventually
abandoned when it was found that the saving of fuel was not substantial.10
Cheap
coal, and coke which even with the wasteful methods of coking represented 70%
of the original product, tended to prevent the rapid development of hot blast.
There existed a strong opinion, too, that for heavy purposes hot-blast iron was
too soft and tender to bear great strain. Only twenty of the furnaces in blast
in South Wales in 1839, approximately one-sixth of those situated on the
bituminous coals, had adopted this invention. Under the pressure of Scottish
competition, the numbers increased considerably by the middle of the century
though the belief in cold-blast iron was still largely unshaken.
Hot
blast achieved its most interesting success, however, when Crane at the
Ystalyfera Works, the last in a long line of experimenters, succeeded in smelting
iron with an anthracite coal. Great expectations were immediately entertained -
"never .... since the first introduction of pit coal for smelting iron
..... did iron manufacture present so interesting an aspect as the present
time, never was there a fairer field for exertion nor a more powerful stimulus
to render it effective.11 They were not fulfilled. The iron was
found to be extremely strong but not malleable, and the prospects of this new
branch of the iron trade immediately declined. A number of works were
established, but in 1849 their total output was 46,704 tons and five years
later 54,500 tons, not equal in either year to the output of the Dowlais Works
alone.12
Most
of the pig-iron produced on the coalfield was made into rails and bars of various
kinds, by first refining and then puddling and rolling. The earlier method was
the slow, laborious refining of iron under hammers and its subsequent drawing
into bar by the hammermen. If the continuity of technical development needs
emphasising, it can be shown that in at least one case, at the Clydach Works,
puddling, as late as 1805, was sandwiched between the finery and the old type
of hammer forge. Here, pig-iron was refined, puddled, shingled into half blooms
and made into bars by the chafery and hammermen.13 But at Merthyr
Tydfil it is clear that the full process of puddling and rolling was in
existence in 1790 and had probably completely superseded the old forge
operations from the beginning.
The
preliminary refining of iron without which, it was alleged, Cort's process was
of little value, was added by Horinfray of Penydarren Works. This addition was
effected soon after the establishment of the first forge in South Wales in
1787, for it was in use at Cyfarthfa in 1790.14 In the puddling
process there was only one other invention of importance, the substitution of
in iron floor in the puddling furnace in place of a sand one as originally
designed by Cort. This was invented in 1818 by the manager of Nantyglo
Ironworks, and as a result, the output of each furnace was more than doubled
and the loss in the process considerably reduced.15 Their inability
to improve or replace the puddling process, which even after the introduction of
iron bottoms accounted for 25% of the cost of bar iron, remained a constant
source of annoyance to the ironmasters.
3 Encyclopaedia
Britannica, 7th Edition, Vol. X11, P-443
4. N.L.W. : Crawshay
Papers, Letter book 18 13-17, 3 0 January, 1817.
5. Bute Estate Archives
: Dowlais Papers.
6.
Menelaus : Transactions of South Wales Institute of Engineers, 1857, p.6. The average
yield of the furnaces at Dowlais in the year ending March 18 5 7, was upwards
of 212-1/2tons per week (each ton 21 cwt. of 120 lbs.).
7. Victoria County
History of Worcester,
Vol. II, p.270.
8.W.Truran: The Iron
Manufactures of Great Britain, p.169 (London, 1855.)
9. OP. Cit: p.113.
10. OP. Cit: p.89-95
11. Mining Journal, 19 August, 1837.
12. Symons : Industrial
Capacities of South Wales, in the Cambrian Journal, Vol. I and 11.
13. N.L.W. John Lloyd
MSS. 5 3.
14 N.L.W. Cyfarthfa
Works Ledgers, 1791-8.
15. J. Percy Iron and
Steel, p.252.
(London, 1869).
About
The Hopkin Thomas Project