¹ The only general survey in English is Harrison, Joseph, An Economic History of Modern Spain (Manchester, 1978).Google Scholar

² See however, Balcells, Albert, “La Mujer Obrera en la Industria Catalana durante el Primer Cuarto del Siglo XX”, in Balcell, Albert, Trabajo Industrial y Organización Obrera en la Catalun¯a Contemporánea, 1900–1936 (Barcelona, 1974), pp. 7–121Google Scholar; Izard, Miguel, Industrialización y Obrerismo. Las Tres Clases de Vapor, 1869–1913 (Barcelona, 1973)Google Scholar; “Entre la Impotencia y la Esperanza. La Unión Manufacturera (7–V–1872 –4–VIII–1873)”, Estudios de Historia Social, 4 (1978), pp. 29–105Google Scholar; Gabriel, Pere, “Sindicats i Classe Obrera a Catalunya, 1900–1923” (Unpublished Ph.D., Barcelona University, 1982)Google Scholar; Duarte, Angel, “Mayordomos y Contramaestres. Jerarquía Fabril en la Industria Algodonera Catalana. 1879–1890”, Historia Social, 4 (1989), pp. 3–20.Google Scholar

³ Turner, H. A., Trade Union Growth, Structure and Spread. A Comparative History of the Cotton Unions (London, 1962)Google Scholar; Kirk, Neville, The Growth of Working-Class Reformism in Mid-Victorian England (Worcester, 1985)Google Scholar; McIvor, Arthur, “Cotton Employers' Organisations and Labour Relations 1890–1939”, in Jowitt, J. A. and McIvor, A. J. (eds), Employers and Labour in the English Cotton Industries, 1890–1939 (London, 1988), pp. 1–26.Google Scholar France and Germany seem to have represented intermediate cases. Employers and the state were not as willing to deal with unions as in England. Nevertheless, union members did not face the same level of hostility as in Catalonia.

⁴ Joaquim Albareda i Salvadó, La Industrialització a la Plana de Vic 1770–1875 (Vic, 1981), pp. 57–62Google Scholar; Izard, Miguel, Industrialización, pp. 59–60Google Scholar; Nadal, Jordi, El Fracaso de la Revolución Industrial en Espan¯a 1814–1913 (Barcelona, 1975), pp. 195–201Google Scholar; “La Formació de la Indústria Moderna”, in Nadal, Jordi and de Motes, Jordi Maluquer (eds), Catalunya, Fàbrica d'Espanya 1833–1936. Un Segle d'Industrialització Espanyola (Barcelona, 1985), pp. 55–56, 70Google Scholar; Instituto de Reformas Sociales, La Jornada de Trabajo en la Industria Textil. Trabajos Preparatorios del Reglamento para la Aplicación del Real Decreto de 24 de Agosto de 1913 (Madrid, 1914), p. 180.Google Scholar

⁵ Garrabou, Ramon, “La Crisi Agrària Espanyola de Finals del Segle XIX: una Etapa del Desenvolupament del Capitalisme”, Reçerques, 5 (1975), pp. 161–216.Google Scholar

⁶ Graell, Guillermo, “La Industria Catalana”, in El Trabajo Nacional [hereafter ETN], 30 07 1902, pp. 65–66Google Scholar; Ferrer, Pau Romeva, Història De La Indústria Catalana (Barcelona, 1952), 2, pp. 419–420.Google Scholar

⁷ For the division of labour in English spinning see, Lazonick, William, “Industrial Relations and Technological Change: The Case of the Self-Acting Mule”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 3 (1979), pp. 231–262Google Scholar; Frefield, Mary, “Technical Change and the ‘Self Acting’ Mule: A Study of Skill and the Sexual Division of Labour”, Social History, II (1986), pp. 319–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸ Arxiu Municipal de Torelló [hereafter AMT], T. Trabajos Varios (2).

⁹ Lazonick, William, “Industrial Relations”, pp. 256–257.Google Scholar

¹⁰ ETN, 1 May 1912, pp. 89–92.

¹¹ Izard, Miguel, Industrialización, pp. 69–74Google Scholar; “Censo Obrero de 1905”, in Anuario Estadístico de la Ciudad de Barcelona, Ano IV, 1905 (Barcelona, 1907), p. 599Google Scholar; Sama, Miguel Sastre y, Las Huelgas en Barcelona y sus Resultados durante el An¯o 1905 (Barcelona, 1907), pp. 12–13Google Scholar; La Jornada (1913), pp. 43, 53–54, 453–459.Google Scholar

¹² El Socialista [hereafter ES], 27 January, 3 February 1899; La Jornada (1913), p. 59.Google Scholar According to the labour journal Revista Social in Barcelona in 1873 power-loom weavers earned an average of 3.5 pesetas a day. In 1905 the average power-loom weaver's wage was 3.16 pesetas a day. See, Izard, Miguel, “Entre la Impotencia y la Esperanza”, p. 31Google Scholar; “Censo Obrero de 1905”, p. 618.Google Scholar

¹³ Nadal, Jordi, El Fracaso, pp. 213–214Google Scholar; Sanz, José María Serrano, El Viraje Proteccion ista de La Restaucación. La Política Comercial Española, 1875–1895 (Madrid, 1987), pp. 164–214Google Scholar; Delgado, José Luis García, “Nacionalismo Económico y Intevención Estatal 1900–1930”, in Albornoz, Nicolás Sánchez (ed.), La Modernización Económica de Espan¯a, 1830–1930 (Madrid, 1985), pp. 184–185.Google Scholar

¹⁴ ETN, 16 September 1907, p. 454; Eusebio Bertrand i Serra, “Un Estudio sobre la Industria Algodonera”, Boletín del Comité Regulador de la Comisión Textil Algodonera (03, 1929), pp. 81–98.Google ScholarSudrià, Caries, “La Exportación en el Desarrollo de la Industria Algodonera Española, 1875–1920”, Revista de Historia Económica, year 1, 2 (Autumn, 1983), pp. 369–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁵ ETN, 1 July 1904, p. 257; 16 July 1909, p. 237. Particularly hard hit by the need to cut production were the Alta Muntanya industrialists who used hydraulic power, for they usually rented the water at a fixed price. The more they used, therefore, the cheaper it became. It was already the case that they had to limit output part of the year due to lack of water. Between 1900 and 1914, however, they found that often they could not work at full production even when water was abundant. La Jornada, pp. 49–50.Google Scholar

¹⁶ de Sard, Andrés, Comparación entre el Actual Estado de Desarrollo de La Industria Algodonera en Inglaterra y el deLa Propia Industria en Espan¯a (Barcelona, 1884), p. 16.Google Scholar

¹⁷ ETN, 30 December 1901, pp. 195–197; 16 May 1911, pp. 239–240; Boletín de la Industria y Comercio de Sabadell, 01 1913Google Scholar; Federación Internacional de Industrias Algodoneras. Memoria del Congreso Celebrado en Bremen los días 25 al 29 de Julio de 1906 (Barcelona, 1907).Google Scholar

¹⁸ Memoria del Congreso Celebrado en Bremen, pp. 199–200.Google Scholar

¹⁹ de Molins, José Elías, La Mujer Obrera en las Ciudades y en el Campo (Barcelona, 1913), pp. 74–75Google Scholar; La Jornada, p. 449.Google Scholar

²⁰ See the complaints by the Alta Muntanya industrialists in La Jornada, pp. 49–50, 224.Google Scholar

²¹ Terrades, Ignasi, Les Colònies Industrials. Un Estudi entorn del Cas de L'Ametlla de Merola (Barcelona, 1979), pp. 155–157Google Scholar; El Ter, 19 05 1900.Google Scholar

²² Comaposada, José, “El Movimiento Fabril”, La Justicia Social [hereafter LJS], 9 08 1913, p. 2Google Scholar; Renté, Miguel, La Abolición del Salario por la Participación en los Beneficios (Barcelona, 1899), p. 23Google Scholar; Izard, Miguel, Industrialización, pp. 85–86.Google Scholar

²³ Comaposada, José, “La Vida en La Comarca del Ter I”, LJS, 4 11 1916, pp. 1–2.Google Scholar

²⁴ This difference in size was, at least in part, the result of technical factors. The Alt Llobregat specialised in the production of low quality standardised textile fabrics. For industrialists in this area it was cheaper to spin and weave the product in the same establishment. However, on the Ter, yarn was produced for somewhat higher quality garments which were more subject to variations in taste and hence to fluctuations in demand. In this branch of the industry it was more economical for a factory which specialised in weaving to purchase the yarn it needed at any given moment rather than spin a large and changeable variety of yarns. The Ter Valley factories, therefore, tended to specialise in spinning alone. Smith, Angel, “Industry, Labour and Politics in Catalonia, 1897–1914” (Unpublished Ph.D., University of London, 1990), p. 35.Google Scholar

²⁵ Comaposada, José, “La Vida I”, op.cit., p. 1.Google Scholar

²⁶ ETN, 17 July 1898, p. 35; Memoria sobre Las Obras Sociales a Favor de Los Trabajadores en La Compañía Anónima de Fabra i Coats de Barcelona (Barcelona, 1916).Google Scholar

²⁷ Negre, Leopoldo, “Enquesta sobre les Condicions Econòmic-Socials de les Conques del Ter i Fresser”, Anuari d' Estadística Social de Catalunya, 1915 (Barcelona, 1917), pp. 124–125Google Scholar; AMT, Estadística del Trabajo. Registro de los Obreros de Ambos Sexos que Trabajan en esta Localidad el 1911.

²⁸ Albareda, Joaquim, op.cit., pp. 99, 105Google Scholar; Graell, Guillermo, Historia del Fomento del Trabajo Nacional (Barcelona, 1911), pp. 442–492Google Scholar; Pla, Juan Sallarés y, El Trabajo de las Mujeres y Nin¯os. Estudio sobre las condiciones actuales (Sabadell, 1892), p. 130Google Scholar; Negre, Leopoldo, op.cit., pp. 102–150.Google Scholar

²⁹ de Reparaz, Gonçal (fil), La Plana de Vic (Barcelona, 1928), p. 110.Google Scholar

³⁰ Comaposada, José, “La Vida del Obrero en la Comarca del Ter X. Manlleu”, LJS, 28 12 1916, p. 2.Google Scholar See also, Albareda, Joaquim and Surinyach, Miquel, La Industrialització a Manlleu. Energia Hidraùlica, Creixement Urba, Treballadors i fabricants (Manlleu, 1987), pp. 33–38, 56–58.Google Scholar

³¹ Along the Alt Ter and around Girona, on the other hand, the task of forming stable unions and political bodies was a far more difficult task, for, in José Comaposada's words: “In spite of their best efforts it is impossible for the workers in the outlying districts to defeat the bourgeoisie single handed. The bourgeoisie has all the power which money, the church, the civil guard and the local authorities can bestow, and all the resources of state power”; Comaposada, José, “La Vida, III”, LJS, 28 12 1916, p. 2.Google Scholar Examples of caciquismo on the Ter are to be found in Joaquim Albareda i Jordi Figuerola, “Una visió de la comarca d'Osona: anàlisi del control social en una comarca d'economia dual”, in Mir, Conxita (ed.), Actitudes Polítiques i Control Social a la Catalunya de la Restauració, 1875–1925 (Lleida, 1989), pp. 171–190.Google Scholar

³² Sastre, Miguel, Las Huelgas en Barcelona, pp. 12–13Google Scholar; Negre, Leopoldo, op.cit., p. 106.Google Scholar From the late nineteenth century through to 1914 working hours in Barcelona cotton textiles were 64 per week. In the Ter Valley they were officially 66 for day and 48 for night work, though they were in reality somewhat longer as workers were expected to take turns and mind each others machines during lunch and dinner breaks. Throughout most of the Alta Muntanya, however, working hours were considerably longer. In the Alt Llobregat a 70-hour week was the minimum. For more details on wages and working hours see Smith, Angel, “Industry, Labour and Politics in Catalonia”, pp. 40–41.Google Scholar

³³ Tilly, Louise and Scott, Joan, “Women's Work and the Family in Nineteenth Century Europe”, in Rosenberg, Charles E. (ed.), The Family in History (Philadelphia, 1975), pp. 151–177.Google Scholar

³⁴ Thus the cotton textile industrialists correctly noted that male workers would not take employment in the preparatory processes “because they regard it as improper of the male sex”. Boletín de la Industria y Comercio de Sabadell, May 1911. It was also for this reason that male workers would often complain at the employers' attempts to pay them a “woman's wage”.

³⁵ AMT (A), C. Asociaciones S. – de 1910 a … Gran Mitin Monstruo en Torelló.

³⁶ Izard, Miguel, “Entre la Impotencia y la Esperanza”; Industrialización, pp. 11–12, 120–129Google Scholar; Casterás, Ramón, Actitudes de los Sectores Catalanes en la Coyuntura de los An¯os 1880 (Barcelona, 1985), pp. 43–100Google Scholar; Gil, F. Dalmases, El Socialismo en Barcelona (Barcelona, 1890), pp. 12–14Google Scholar; Reventós, Manuel, Assaig sobre alguns Episodis dels Moviments Socials a Barcelona en el Segle XIX (Barcelona, 1925), pp. 157–159.Google Scholar

³⁷ See, for example, ETN, 1 November 1907, pp. 521–522; 16 September 1909, p. 291; 16 May 1911, pp. 213–214; Tremols, F. Rahola y, op.cit., pp. 365–366Google Scholar; Maura, Joaquín Romero, La Rosa del Fuego: el obrerismo barcenolés de 1899 a 1909 (Barcelona, 1975), pp. 429–431.Google Scholar

³⁸ ES, 8 November, 6 December 1889.

³⁹ On these strikes see, Izard, Miguel, Industrialización, pp. 167–172Google Scholar; Ferrer, Joaquim, El Primer “1er de Maig” a Catalunya (Barcelona, 1972), pp. 61–68.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ La Publicidad [hereafter LP], 14 October 1891. He continued: “This to my mind is the only way to resolve these social questions, and is very different from the stance generally taken (by the employers) in Catalonia, which leaves the men without a job”.

⁴¹ LP, 14 October 1891; ES, 23 November 1891. The real motives behind the lock-out were pin-pointed by the correspondent of La Publicidad, who stated: “It seems that some intransigents, spurred on by the results of the conflicts in Ripoll, Manresa and the Llobregat, want to make a last ditch stand and subject their workers to the same conditions as in the factories in these towns. That is to say to break their old customs.” These were, he added, the agreements that men should work the ring-frames and that no worker could be sacked without a justifiable reason. LP, l November 1891.

⁴² LP, November–December, 1891; Comaposada, José, “La Vida, X”, op.cit., pp. 1–2.Google Scholar

⁴³ de Catalun¯a, Juan (pseudonym of Joan Codina), “Los Obreros de la Industria Textil III”, La Justicia, 19 02 1930, pp. 3–4Google Scholar; Castillo, Santiago, “Los Orígines de la Organización Obrera en Espan¯a: de la Federación de Tipógrafos a la UG de T”, Estudios de Historia Social, 26–27 (1983), pp. 102–104Google Scholar; La República Social, 3 03 1897, 12 01, 20 04 1898.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Harrison, R. J., “Catalan Business and the Loss of Cuba”, Economic History Review, 2nd series, XXVII (08, 1974), pp. 434–435.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ ES, 14 January, 25 February 1898, 24 February 1899; El Ter, 18 December 1897, 25 February 1899; LP, 17 February, Morning Edition [hereafter ME], 20 February, ME, 1899.

⁴⁶ de Catalun¯a, Juan, “Los Obreros de la Industria Textil IV. Continua el Relato”, La Justicia, 26 02 1930, p. 2.Google Scholar That the workers intended the agreement to be honoured was shown later in the year in Torelló, where a strike was called in the Colomer factory after a woman had been employed on a ring-frame. ES, 29 September 1899.

⁴⁷ On this point see, de Catalun˜a, Juan, “Los Obreros de la Industria Textil IV”, p. 2.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Particularly important in this respect was the case of Ripoll which had a large working-class population. A new union was formed in the town in August 1899, and the employers were almost immediately presented with a demand for improved wages and working conditions. The strike which followed met with success, and an accord was signed which stipulated not only an increase in wages, but also that, “the means by which the personnel on the ring-frames might be changed, occupying them with men, will be subject to study”. ES, 29 September 1899.

⁴⁹ ES, 10 February, 10 March 1899.

⁵⁰ LP, 11 September 1899, ME.

⁵¹ LP, 11 September, ME, 18 October, ME 1899, 5 July, ME, 1900; Revista Fabril, 7 12, 5 07 1900Google Scholar; La Plana de Vich, 1 08 1900.Google Scholar

⁵² Revista Fabril, 20 04, 5, 12 and 19 07 1900.Google Scholar

⁵³ This became official policy at the federation's second congress, at which a delegate from Vic presented a motion which asked: “Is it advisable that as the spinning machines and power-looms become vacant they be occupied by men over fourteen years of age?” He stated that in his town this policy had been implemented and was a great success. The motion was then put to the vote and approved unanimously. Revista Fabril, 5 07 1900.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Revista Fabril, 1 and 28 12, 1900.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Conditions were to improve little in forthcoming years. 1902 saw a poor harvest in Castile. Then, between 1904 and 1905, the whole of Spain suffered an agrarian depression. Harrison, R. J., “The Spanish Famine of 1904–1906”, Agricultural History, Vol. XLVII (1973), pp. 302–310.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ La Plana de Vich, 8 August 1900. By this time there were four employer associations in the Ter and Freser: Manlleu and District, Vic-Roda, Alt Ter and Freser, and Torelló and Sant Quirze.

⁵⁷ Thus “A Worker” declared in La Publicidad on the real motives behind the employers' actions: “As the Textile Federation tends to regulate these machines [i.e., the ring-frames] it is not surprising that the industrialists try by all means at their disposal to destroy the workers' organisation”. LP, 6 January 1900, ME.

⁵⁸ LP, 18 and 19 October, ME, 1900.

⁵⁹ LP, 9 and 22 October, ME, 1900.

⁶⁰ On the repression see, El Trabajo, 14 12 1900Google Scholar; ES, 23 November 1900.

⁶¹ Comaposada, José, “La Vida del Obrero”, op.cit., X, p. 1.Google Scholar For Socialist criticism of the general strike see, ES, 14 December 1900, 8 February 1901.

⁶² El Progreso, 26 10 1909.Google Scholar

⁶³ El Progreso, 10 07 1909.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ La Plana de Vich, 14 03 1901.Google Scholar The various reports of these events stressed the role played by working-class women. Thus according to one correspondent: “Amongst the rioters who committed those outrages a multitude of women were to be seen, especially in Manlleu. No doubt they threw themselves onto the public footpath on seeing that they had nothing to give their children, and that the strike imposed by their bosses had shut out any hope”. La Plana de Vich, 21 03 1901.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ La Plana de Vich, 28 03 1901.Google Scholar These negotiations had another favourable result for the workers. Serious disagreements between the mill owners led to a weakening of employer organisation on the Ter. Juan de Catalun˜a, “Después del Pacto del Hambre VI”, La Justicia, 15 05 1930, p. 2.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ La Guerra Social, 18 07 1903.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ On the Manlleu friendly society see, Rusin˜ol, Albert, Bases para la Creación y el Funcionamiento de los Jurados Mixtos en Manlleu – Proyecto de Montepío redactado por D. Federico Rahola por Encargo de la Junta de Conciliación – con un Prólogo de D. Joaquín Aguilar (Barcelona, 1902)Google Scholar; Asociaciones de Fabricantes del Ter y del Freser, Los Jurados Mixtos en Espan˜a. Datos y Consideraciones Acerca de la Conciliación y el Arbitraje en los Conflictos entre Patronos y Obreros (Barcelona, 1902)Google Scholar; AMM, Gover-nació S149, A 395, El Productor, 26 10 1901Google Scholar; La Guerra Social, 4 07 1903.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ El Trabajo, 23 05 1908Google Scholar; Solidaridad Obrera [hereafter SO], 4 12 1908Google Scholar; La Internacional, 5 02 1909.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ The occasional attempt was still made to substitute men or women on the ring-frames. A case in point was the Baurier company town outside Roda. SO, 8 January 1909.

⁷⁰ SO, 4 June 1909; La Internacional, 28 05 1908Google Scholar; LP, 2 June, ME, 7 June, Night Edition [hereafter NE], 12 June, NE, 1909; El Progreso, 3,4 and 5 07 1909Google Scholar; LJS, 6 November, 4 December 1909, 19 February, 17 September 1910; AMM, Gobernación, pp. 149, 395.Google Scholar

⁷¹ ES, 18 April 1913; LP, 4 and 28 July 1913.

⁷² La Espan˜a Industrial en su 82 Aniversario, 1874–1929 (Barcelona, 1929), p. 94.Google Scholar See also, ETN, 30 May 1897; Revista del Ateneo Obrero de Barcelona, 12 1897.Google Scholar

⁷³ Revista del Ateneo Obrero de Barcelona, 12 1897Google Scholar; Moreover, Miguel Renté, one of the magazine's principal writers, lamented that friendly benefits had only been established in two factories from Sant Martí and one from Barcelona, . Op.cit., pp. 75–76.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Indeed, reports suggest that at the turn of the century in the larger Barcelona concerns the female power-loom weavers were subject to close managerial supervision, and that talking was not permitted while work was in progress. Vila, Pau, “Records d'un Treballa-dor”, L'Avenç, 9 (01, 1978), p. 27.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ As we have seen, most men considered female employment as something transitory, to be undertaken by young unmarried women. Many had to accept the employment of their wives in order to supplement family income. Nevertheless, they continued to view the use of female labour, while male workers were unemployed, as an unacceptable imposition on the part of the industrialists. Accordingly, they found it difficult to accept female workers as an integral part of the labour movement. This explains why syndicalist labour leaders frequently complained that in spite of the fact that male skilled workers and female textile workers often formed part of the same family, the male trade unionists did little to try and unionise the women. See, SO, 23 July 1911; LJS, 5 August 1911; El Sindicalista, 26 10 1912.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ See SO, 16 November 1907. As in the Alta Muntanya these demands seem to have received considerable support from the female workers concerned. This was revealed in an article written by Adela Camprubí, a female power–loom weaver who spoke at a number of rallies held to organise the cotton textile workers in 1901. She argued: “It is essential that union organisation spread from factory to factory, and loom to loom. That we should make a start, in order first to reduce working hours, and later to hand over our machines to the men, our beloved colleagues”. El Productor, 16 11 1901.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ El Productor, 9, 16, 23 and 30 11, 7 12 1901.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ SO, 1 and 17 May 1913.

⁷⁹ LP, 23 July 1913.

⁸⁰ LP, 31 July, 18 and 27 August 1913.

⁸¹ LP, 28 July, 2 August 1913; LJS, 23 August; IRS, La Jornada, pp. 599–603.Google Scholar

⁸² LP, 1, 4 and 6 August 1913; IRS, La Jornada, pp. 599–603.Google Scholar

⁸³ IRS, La Jornada, pp. 510–513.Google Scholar The link between the radicalism of the power-loom weavers, and the difficulties they faced when trying to unionise was noted by the more reformist sectors of the bourgeoisie. Thus, La Vanguardia stated in August: “It must be admitted that part of the blame for the slavery (of the textile workers) lies with the employers and the conservative classes who, with short sighted and selfish criteria have obstructed all serious organisation on the part of the workers. It is true that organised workers are a danger to many pockets and many insatiable strong boxes, but unorganised workers are an even greater danger to society. They are the raw material of all tumults, as soon as anyone ill-intentioned stirs up the flames of revolt. Those of us who defend biological nationalism must hope that the workers will organise, thereby sanctioning the work of nature […]. That is socialism? It is preferable that it should be socialism – which on the other hand it is not – rather than anarchism or perpetual chaos.” LP, 9 August 1913.

⁸⁴ LP, 17 and 23 August; IRS, La Jornada, pp. 543–551.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ In a letter addressed to the Home Secretary Josep Muntades stated that the workers had been forced out on strike, and that the movement was part of an international conspiracy which had also affected the industrial centres of France and Italy. He concluded that the Royal Decree would lead to a “civil war” in the factories. LP, 26 and 29 August; IRS, La Jornada, pp. 550–558.Google ScholarAnuari d'Estadística Social de Catalunya, Vol. II, 1913 (Barcelona, 1915), pp. 96–97.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ IRS, La Jornada, pp. 611–613.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ On this congress see, LP, 21 and 28 December 1913; SO, 1 January 1914; LJS, 3 and 10 January, 7 February 1914.

⁸⁸ LJS, 1 November 1913: 17 and 31 January, 21 and 28 February, 28 March, 4 April 1914; SO, 26 March 1914; AMT, T. Trabajos Varios (2); AMM, Gobernació, S 152, A 398.

⁸⁹ Industrialists in large-scale heavy industry found it easier to stop their workers from unionising. Hence before 1914 over much of Europe in the iron and steel industries unions were effectively banned. The best documented case is Germany. Nevertheless, in Spain the Viscayan industrialists adopted a similar policy. Juan Pablo Fusi, Política Obrera en el País Vasco (Madrid, 1975), pp. 129, 484–485.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ In this article the role of the state in labour disputes has been stressed. However, in order to analyse the alienation of Catalan workers from the state more fully other factors such as its inability to enforce social legislation and the backwardness of the social security system, the manipulation of elections, and the unpopularity of the colonial wars, would need to be discussed. For the importance of these factors in the “(non) integration” of national working classes see, van der Linden, Marcel, “The National Integration of European Working Classes (1871–1914)”Google Scholar, International Review of Social History, XXXIII (1988), pp. 285–311.Google Scholar

⁹¹ See, for example, Fontana, Josep, “Transformaciones Agrarias y Crecimiento Económico en la Espan˜a Contemporánea” in Fontana, Josep, Cambio Económico y Actitudes Políticas en la Espan˜a del Siglo XX (Barcelona, 1973), pp. 189–190.Google Scholar

⁹² de Riquer, Borja, “El Conservadurime Polític Català: del Fracàs del Moderantisme al Desencís de la Restauradó”, Recerques, 11 (1981), pp. 29–80Google Scholar; Harrison, Joseph, “The Catalan Industrial Elite, 1898–1923”, in Lannon, F. and Preston, Paul (eds), Elites and Power in Twentieth Century Spain (Oxford, 1990), pp. 45–70.Google Scholar

⁹³ Kirby, R. and Musson, A. E., The Voice of the People: John Doherty (Manchester, 1975)Google Scholar; Dutton, H. I. and King, J. E., “The Limits of Paternalism: the Cotton Tyrants of Lancashire, 1836–54”, Social History, 4 (01, 1982), pp. 59–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kirk, Neville, The Growth of Working-Class Reformism, pp. 54–72.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Kirk, Neville, The Growth of Working-Class Reformism, pp. xi–xii.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Ibid., passim. For stress on state “liberalisation”, see also Jones, Gareth Stedman, “Rethinking Chartism”, in Jones, Gareth Stedman, Languages of Class, Studies in English Working-Class History 1832–1983 (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 174–178.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Lazonick, William, op. cit., pp. 253–255.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ On this second point the commission stated that: “[…] the docility (quietismo) of the English workers is the result of the assurances they receive from the employers' union, which maintains the collective agreements reached without any variation. It thereby offers confidence to the worker who, in return, offers peace to the employer. By this means the industry acquires continuity, that is to say life. The situation is very different to that of other countries and especially our own, which is the most in need of not suffering upheavals. Despite this, most industrialists do no accept the rights of labour, and prefer strikes, with the accidents that go with them, to a collective agreement with the workers.” Memoria Descriptiva Redactada por la Comisión Obrera Catalana para Estudiar el Estado de las Fabricas de Hilados y Tejidos en Algodón en Inglaterra (Barcelona, 1889), pp. 6–7.Google Scholar

⁹⁸ Fowler, Alan and Wyke, Terry (eds), The Barefoot Aristocrats. A History of the Amalgamated Association of Operative Cotton Spinners (Littleborough, 1987), p. 119.Google Scholar

⁹⁹ White, J. L., The Limits of Trade Union Militancy. The Lancashire Cotton Textile Workers 1910–1914 (New York, 1978).Google Scholar