SILENTNIGHT EXTRACTS.

[Stanley]

SILENTNIGHT EXTRACTS.

INDEX ENTRIES AS OF 09 August 2006

Silentnight and Salterforth shed
Slater’s had a fire in March 1929 and Percy Slater, son of James Slater, died suddenly aged 43 in October 1929. There was nobody in the family to carry on and so the mill was sold to a Manchester firm in 1930. It still traded as James Slater and Son. Manchester exchange directories for 1952 and 1957 show them still trading. No mention in 1965 directory. Salterforth Mill was the first mill in Barlick to electrify in 1955/56 when the insurance company forced them to drop the boiler pressure to 80psi, not enough to run the engine. [ A further problem was that the original boiler was very narrow and it wasn’t possible to find a secondhand boiler that would fit in the house.] The Clough fire in 1958/59 forced Silentnight to rent space in Wellhouse and Salterforth mills. They bought Wellhouse in 1978. Mary Wilkin said that she wove at Salterforth Shed until it closed in 1972 so it looks as though Silentnight bought Salterforth Shed shortly after then.

Silentnight at Clough Mill.
I interviewed John Sayers Metcalfe in 1982. He was manager for Slater Brothers when they closed and had been there since August 1932. He said that closed in 1956 and Slater Brothers sold the mill to Tom Clarke in the same year. The fire at Clough seems to have been about 1959 as that was when Tom bought Moss Shed. Harold Duxbury said that the mill stood derelict after the fire and was demolished in 1972. Silentnight gave the site to the council and it is now Clough Vale Park.

Silentnight at Wellhouse Mill
Victor Hedges told me that in a conversation with Harold Duxbury Harold said that it would have paid CHSC to pay someone £5,000 to take the mill off them. As it was Tom Clarke bought it, 1978?

Silentnight. General
Tom and Joan Clarke formed Clarke’s Mattresses in 1946 in Skipton using his Air Force gratuity. Tom once told me he made his first wire mattresses in his back yard. Two years later the company started making beds at another site in Skipton but rapid expansion forced them to seek new premises and they moved to Barlick in 1949. In 1951 the name of the firm was changed to Silentnight and in the late 1950s the company were producing more than 4,000 divan sets each month and the workforce had grown from 25 to 150. In 1955 a fire destroyed their premises in Butts Mill but production was only interrupted for a short time as Clough Mill wove out in 1956 and the firm moved in there. In 1960 after Clough had burned down TC bought Moss and this became the main manufacturing site. Two shift operation came in in 1968 and production increased to more than 16,000 divan sets each month. [There is something wrong with this chronology as Roy ?, of the Wild Bunch, says he worked at Clough in 1959 and couldn’t remember a fire. He said that Silentnight moved into Moss in 1960 and Craven Pad moved into Clough Mill. He said that they were sent down to Moss in their spare time to do odd jobs if work was slack at Clough]

OTHER QUOTATIONS.

Harold Duxbury 1982
R - Ah but wait a minute, James Slater were at Salterforth before they left Wellhouse. You see they'd only a section of Wellhouse and they were ready for……. When Silent Night started in Barnoldswick at Butts Mill, they hadn't been there long before they had a severe fire and burned them out. Calf Hall Shed Company's property! Tom Clarke had nowhere to go, closed his business.

This’d be the fifties something like that?

R - Aye, that would be, yes. You see Slaters were at Salterforth long before that. Anyway Slaters were under notice at Wellhouse and I went to see them when Tom Clarke were burned out. Would they let Tom Clarke go into, would they get a move on? I arranged with them that they'd clear one end and Tom could go in at one end and they'd gradually get out at t’other. Tom Clarke went to Wellhouse. He was there until he bought Moss and John Widdup were in't Widdup's office, the boss, they were all directors of the Moss Shed Company, Aldersley's are directors and they said to me, very outspoken people, were Widdups, "Get this place sold for us!” I said, "You're not serious?'' They said, “We are!” I said, "Well, how much do you want? How much have I to get?'' They said, "Get what tha can.” Within a day or two, Tom Clarke said to me, he says, "Can you find me a bigger place?” I said, "I might be able to do.” and I told him what I had in mind. I said “I think I can buy it.” and he says, "what can you get it for?” I says, "I'll have to go back but I know what I would say, £25,000. I went back to Widdup's and it were as easy as that. [Twenty years later I was talking to one of the Widdups and he volunteered the information that Moss was sold for £25,000 to Tom Clarke so this checks out. SG]

ROLLS ROYCE TENANCY AT WELLHOUSE MILL.

In the mid 1950s the cotton trade in Barlick had entered terminal decline and the Calf Hall Shed Company, who owned Calf Hall, Butts and Wellhouse were increasingly finding that they were letting space to non-textile firms like Clarke’s Mattresses at Butts, later to become Silentnight.

In July 1954 CHSC received their first enquiry from Rolls Royce who needed some space to store machine tools. The space was occupied by James Slater Ltd but they couldn’t compete with the rent RR were probably able to pay. This overture came to nothing as Rolls didn’t proceed and the space was let eventually to Clarke’s Mattresses who had suffered a fire at Butts.

In November 1955 Mr Riker of Rolls Royce approached CHSC again having heard on the grapevine that Nutter Brothers were vacating their space at the end of March 1956. This lease was sealed by the CHSC on the 22nd of March 1956 and RR took the space from the beginning of April 1956 at a rent of £550 for the first year and £1550 for the succeeding six years of the lease, RR to pay for the heating. This caused the CHSC directors some inconvenience as RR wanted steam heat 24 hours a day, seven days a week. As the mills normally only worked a day shift during the week this meant that a boilerman had to be provided to run full time, I get the impression that the directors had missed this point in the negotiations.

At the same time RR intimated that they might be interested in another 10,000 to 30,000 square feet in the near future. This coincided with a complaint from W E & D Nutter that due to the number of looms stopped at Wellhouse they required a reduction in rent. In addition the directors had heard that the Nutter interests had given notice on two tenancies at Burnley. It was decided that the future lay with Rolls Royce as a permanent tenant and that if necessary the CHSC would give W E & D Nutter six months notice to quit. This was the beginning of the end for weaving at Wellhouse. The engine ran until 1960 but effectively weaving at Wellhouse received its death blow when RR took the space in April 1956.


Extracted entries from the Calf Hall Shed Company records.

CHSC Minute books. 22/07/1954. Report that an enquiry had been received from Rolls Royce as to the possibility of renting warehouse space at Wellhouse Mill. Resolved that the shed portion (approx. 10,800 square feet) now occupied by James Slater Ltd for storage be offered to Rolls Royce at £600 per annum to include heating and rates if Messrs. James Slater were not prepared to pay that amount. 26/08 1954. RR were offered the space but said that they only needed about a third of that amount for storage of machine tools. Mr Riker of Rolls said that he hoped they would eventually want all the space. Resolved that the space be offered to Rolls at £600 per annum, CHSC to pay rates and RR to pay a proportionate cost of heating. The rest of the space to be kept vacant. 18/11/1954. RR not in a position to go forward with renting the space so it was offered to Clarke’s Mattresses at £1,000 per annum including heating. This was agreed, Clarke’s to take over the space on 01/04/1955. This arrangement started on that date, the rent was £1054 per annum. 17/11/1955. RR approached CHSC with a view to taking over the space at Wellhouse occupied by Nutter Brothers who had given notice to quit on 30/04/1956. 19/01/1956,A lease prepared and sent to RR for Nutter Bros space, rent to be £1550 and an allowance for the first year of £1000 towards putting the space in order. At the same meeting it was reported that RR had made a verbal enquiry for another 10,000 to 30,000 square feet. 22/03/1956. Lease for Nutter space sealed by CHSC, to run for seven years. [As RR wanted steam heat 24 hours a day the directors had to make arrangements for boiler to be fired at extra cost] 4/06/1956. The board resolved that due to the bad state of trade they should endeavour to secure RR as a permanent tenant and to this end they would give 6 months notice to W E & D Nutter who were in a poor state.


SCG/20/04/2004











CLOUGH SITE IN WAPPING, BARLICK.
1753 and 1756. Josias Parkinson pays land tax for Clough, Barnoldswick. 1760 John Dean pays land tax for Clough. 1800. Hartley, Bracewell and Co occupied the water mill on the site [Note that this is almost certainly neither the Coates or Newfield edge branch. The root for all the Bracewells in Barlick was the Bracewells of Salterforth, all the family members we are interested in stem from there. This Bracewell would have direct lineage to Salterforth but no connection with Coates or Newfield Edge.]. This might have been the original build. 1807. William Mitchell mentioned on electoral roll as spinner of Barnoldswick. [this is Mitchell of Mitchell’s Mill Barlick and not County Brook Mitchells who hadn’t come to the area. Ken Wilson says that Newfield Edge House was built by William Mitchell in 1770. He’s usually accurate but I don’t know what his evidence was.] Insurance for the Hartley, Bracewell and Co occupation was Mill £200. Mill work £10, Machinery £150. stock £40. This was not a big mill judging from these values. This could be the ‘old cotton mill’ insured by William Mitchell in 1812. Mill £500. Machinery £500. Drying house for warps £50. [This indicates dyeing] Stock £250. [These are significantly higher values] Mitchell extended the mill and installed an engine in 1827. In 1831 the insurance values were: Mill, engine house and sizing house, £700. Millwork £100. Machinery £1500. Stock £100. In 1838 John Wigglesworth was a tenant in the mill. 1846. Clough Mill is built next to Mitchell’s Mill by William Mitchell to hold 300 looms. The first tenants were William, Thomas and Christopher Bracewell [of Coates] who also had Old Coates Mill as well as looms in Mitchell’s Mill. Clough was built by Barlick masons but the chimney was by David Carr from Gargrave. [There is solid insurance evidence for an engine by 1827 so was this a new chimney?] The first looms in the new shed were wooden framed and came from Pilling’s at Trawden. This firm removed to Primet Bridge Colne at about this time. In 1860 the Bracewell Brothers cease trading when their partnership fails and Mr Bennett the Baptist minister takes space in Clough. [See below]

SLATERS AT CLOUGH
In 1860 John Slater and Sons are first mentioned as tenants in Clough. John Slater buys the mill in 1867 for £3,000. [£1000 in May 1867, £1000 in November 1867 and £1000 by May 1868.] The full price was paid by November 1867. John Slater also had an interest in the silk mill at Galgate near Lancaster.

1881census gives Joseph Slater as 19 and living on Mitchell Terrace in Barlick. In 1891 Census he is living at Newfield Edge and married Ada Whitaker Bracewell. Almost looks as though Billycock death was the trigger for the marriage. LTP transcript 82/JM/01. John Metcalfe talks about Slaters and says they were all related. All stem back to John Slater who bought Mitchell’s Mill in 1867 (later called Clough) [Actually there are earlier references to the Slaters but as regards cotton manufacturing we are safe in starting with John.]. James Slater at Salterforth Mill was Old John’s son. Henry Slater was another son of Old John and he fathered Fred Harry and Joseph which made them cousins to Clough Mill Slaters. John Slater (Clough) was another son of Old John. Old John ran a silk mill at Galgate before he came to Barlick. One of the reasons he survived cotton famine and was in a position to buy Clough was that he was in silk at Galgate and experimented with worsted and linen at Barlick. 1851 census notes the following at 28 Barnoldswick Lane. [Now Manchester Road] John Slater, head,45, grocer [also known to have a loomshop on Barlick Lane and a carting business.] Mary, wife, 43. Joseph, 22, HLW cotton check. Henry, 20, shop man. Thomas, 17, coal carrier. Clayton, 12, scholar. Susannah, 9, scholar. James, 6, scholar. John Slater died in 1867, Atkinson has him as 69 years but 1851 census says 61.

There is a report in 1860 of Thomas Bennett’s bankruptcy, he was a small manufacturer in Clough Mill. This seemingly minor event in the life of Clough Mill deserves close scrutiny. When the Act of Uniformity was passed in 1662 Barlick already had an illegal Baptist church in the barn backing onto the Parrock in Wapping. This is on the opposite side of the road from the Mitchell/Clough Mill site. It was one of the first places in England to be registered under the Toleration Act of 1689. In 1687 David Crossley and his cousin William Mitchell were both preachers in the district and in 1694 David Crossley was named as the first minister. In 1797 a chapel was built adjoining the barn and still exists, but as a secondhand furniture shop. The crucial fact here is that a William Mitchell was active in the Wapping area as early as the late 17th C. There are land tax assessments for the same time for James and William Mitchell but no indication of the properties. The assumption must be that it was in the same area. The History of the Baptists in Barnoldswick by Winnard (p.39) states that on January 7th 1695 David Crossley, the pastor of the Baptist Chapel purchased the Parrock (or part thereof) from William Mitchell for £25 as it adjoined their place of worship. [Note that this piece of land also contains Parrock Laithe and water mill] The Mitchell family maintained their association with the chapel in Wapping.

The Slaters who followed in the mill were Baptists as well. In 1861 there is an entry in the census for Thomas Bennett, 39, unmarried, Baptist minister of Bethesda Chapel and cotton manufacturer employing 43 persons. By this time the Bethesda Chapel at the bottom of Manchester Road, opposite the police station and now demolished and replaced by David Crossley House, had been built. This was the time of the cotton famine and the story is that Bennett was encouraged by John Slater to start manufacturing in Clough to make work for his parishioners. Bennett goes out of business about 1868, bankrupt, because after John’s death in c.1868 the Slater Brothers foreclosed on him. According to Dennis Cairns, at the same time Clayton Slater led an attack on Bennett to depose him as pastor of Bethesda. [Clayton seems to have been a bit fiery, at about the same time he and a brother were fined £5 for assaulting Levi Widdup who had allowed his donkey to graze on their father’s grave.] In 1870 Thomas Bennett was found to have been not legally dismissed as pastor but by this time the rebel members of the congregation, being trustees of Bethesda, refused to allow him to take over the chapel. For a while, both sides of the schism worshipped in various barns and rooms but eventually resolved the dispute by allowing Bennett to have use of Bethesda but the rebels building a rival chapel in North Street behind Clough Mill. This situation continued until 1971 when the two churches united in a new building next to the police station. This saga demonstrates the close links between the church and the mill and the passions that could be aroused.

After John’s death, c.1868, the firm of John Slater and Sons take over the whole of Clough. The partners were the sons, Joseph, Henry, Thomas, Clayton and James. William Atkinson says that in 1868 Clough was extended again to take more looms and the floor above was used for preparing woollen weft. [We have a tendency to assume that all the firms we look at were processing cotton. What we have to bear in mind from 1860 onwards is that a lot of manufacturers were experimenting with different staple because of the shortage of cotton due to the American Civil War.] This was discontinued after a few years and Stephen Pickles moved in with looms. Robinson Brooks started in Clough about this time. James Nutter was a tenant in partnership with Slater Edmondson. [They had amassed their capital by selling Bibles and Stephen Pickles grandson of original Stephen said that they used to threaten farmers with cattle maiming to get them to buy the family bibles at a guinea a time but this could be apocryphal] The Pickles family including brother Harry moved out to US during the Cotton Famine but came back in 1868. The family started up in Clough with four looms each (16 looms?) and Stephen Pickles (b.1856) was the Manchester man. This was the start of S Pickles and Son Ltd who eventually had the whole of Long Ing and Barnsey Shed.

In 1879 a new shed was built at Clough and it was then that the Furneval engine was installed to replace the 1827 beam engine [which was left in situ and later used again when loom numbers fell]. In 1880 Clayton Slater, 41 years old, one of the partners, left for Canada taking part of the machinery with him. There was space to spare as they had just extended so tenants were the answer. Atkinson describes Clough at this time as being the starting point for many of the firms which were later to dominate textiles in Barlick. He describes Clough as four storeys with weaving on all floors, 144 looms on each floor. Robinson Brooks was on the top floor [evidence of Billy Brooks who learned to weave there and hated going up in the hoist] Billy said the loft was used for warp preparation. Atkinson said the tenants at that time were James Nutter and Slater Edmondson in partnership with 96 looms. Windles, [see article in CH 30/12/1932. William Windle was born in Earby on January 3 1825. The 1881 census shows him aged 56 and living on Newtown with wife Margaret, 52, Owen 22, James T. 15, Edna 24, Sarah T 19. In 1891 William senior is missing but the rest of the family are living at 24 Rainhall Road with the addition of William, 44 years old. His father was Thomas Windle. In his early years William was a HLW and was one of the first PLW to work at Chris. Bracewell’s New Shed. In 1859 he married Margaret Broughton and became a taper at Butts and worked there for many years. In his later years he had 16 looms in Clough and was doing commission weaving. Francis Watson had 16 looms on the same terms and William tackled for both of them. There is a suggestion that Joseph Windle, commonly called ‘Pummers’ was in Clough but this might be a confusion.] Robinson Brooks, 80 looms. [Moved to Long Ing shortly after it opened.], John Brown (moved to Long Ing in 1888 with 98 looms. (Noted in Barrett 1887 as cotton manufacturer and engineer, house Albion Terrace.) and Bowker (All I have for Thomas Bowker is CFT 1890 moving his looms out of Coates Mill and Barrett 1896 noting him as manufacturer in Long Ing Shed. Not sure if this is Bowker mentioned in Clough). Slaters had looms as well. [Not all the brothers working in the partnership, see James. Clayton had already voted with his feet.] John Metcalfe, the former manager said Ormerod’s had looms in Clough as well. He said that ‘Nutters’ had 96 looms in what they called ‘top o’ the hill’. [This was Nutter and Edmondson actually]

In 1888 Craven Herald reported that tenants in Clough were Robinson Brooks, Stephen Pickles, and Messrs H&J Slater. Edmondson and Nutter moved out of Clough in 1888 and went to the new mill at Long Ing with 400 looms. Partnership dissolved in 1890 when James Nutter moved into Calf Hall with 414 looms. Slater Edmondson stayed at Long Ing with 400 looms. In 1905 James Nutter moved from Calf Hall to Bankfield with 900 looms. Eventually took over Bancroft from Nutter Brothers.

Joseph Slater (married Billycock’s daughter Ada Whitaker) Henry and Fred Harry Slater seem to have been the main men in John Slater and Sons at this time. BUDC rate books for 26 March 1894 show Henry, trading as Clough Mill Company as owner of Clough Mill. Half year rates £176. Fred Harry died in 1930 aged 60. [He was also a founding director of Westfield Shed and a past director of the Long Ing Shed Co] Joseph died at Newfield Edge on 22/02/1926. They and their descendants ran Clough until they wove out in 1956. John Metcalfe, the manager said that when they finished they had 280 looms on the ground floor and upstairs they had 20 Universal winders and 20 warp dressing frames as they were doing a lot of coloured work then.

With the rise of the shed companies from 1888 onwards tenancy at Clough seems to have died out. This is entirely understandable as Clough was a very old-fashioned and inconvenient mill. Newton Pickles says there was a fire at Clough about 1938, (1937 actually, see report in Barlick and Earby Times November 12th 1937) B&P replaced a lot of damaged cast iron pipes with steel. John Metcalfe said he went to work for Slaters in Wellhouse Mill in 1915, he said these Slaters were cousins of the ones at Clough [Edwin and John Slater, sons of Hartley later traded as Slater Brothers (Barnoldswick) Ltd.] John also said that in 1900 there was a fire in the four storey section of the mill and it was allowed to go to ‘rack and ruin’. “Joe Slater, Dick Carr Slater, Fred Harry and them” wouldn’t do anything about it but when Fred Harry and Joe died Henry got the mill. Henry had been running Slater Brothers at Wellhouse Mill. The four storey section was started up again and 128 looms brought from Wellhouse and put in the second floor. While the four storey section was disused they were weaving in the new shed in the bottom with 368 looms.

Silentnight bought Clough Mill off the Slaters and used it for bedding manufacture. There was a disastrous fire that gutted the mill and the remains were demolished about 1972 and Tom Clarke gave the site to the Council for a recreation ground.


What I was experiencing at Ellenroad was a symptom of what was happening in industry outside my zone of comprehension and experience. There was no such thing as loyalty, everyone was expendable. I recognised what I called Management by Attrition creeping in at Coates. People were being pushed to deliver more for the same money. Posts vanished overnight and the workload was spread amongst the survivors. The whole ethos was accountant led, the bean counters were coming to the fore and as far as I can see are still in charge. I was having a conversation with Tom Clarke, the founder of Silentnight,, the bedding company in Barlick once in his hi-tech office at Salterforth. I asked him what it was like to be heading the biggest bedding company in the world and how things had changed since he started making mattresses in his back yard after the war financed with his gratuity. He told me it had gone to hell in a basket. In the early days he had been in control but now, as head of the biggest mattress makers in the world he was powerless. He put it down to his accountants and gave me a definition that I have always remembered, “An accountant is a man who turns the radiators off as he passes them in a corridor.” I like that, think about it!

This was when I had my first experience of working with government departments and committees. All I can say is that their world moves on a parallel plane, completely divorced from the realities I had do face. Months of discussion went by while Bancroft moved inevitably towards closure. Eventually support was given and we agreed a format for the exercise. When, by early 1978 we were all agreed I have to admit that the process of consultation, if not the time it took, had been worth while. Peter White had suggested an oral history project and I had refined this by suggesting we used decisive moments from processes captured on black and white prints as triggers for informants. In other words, the informants described in their own words what they were doing in a picture of the process, a series of images would cover the whole process and the result would be a cohesive description straight from the horse’s mouth. This was further expanded by agreeing with Elizabeth Roberts at CNWRS that we could use her standard questions on social history thus adding another dimension to the project. Most important we agreed that the project had to be fully transcribed and indexed and the master copies of all material deposited in the library at Lancaster University. The short name for the project was the Lancashire Textile Project and during 1978 the LTP took up an enormous amount of my time. I spent a couple of months making enquiries of various authorities as to what the best recording equipment was, what tape we should use, and various other technical matters. By June I was ready and started to do the recordings, my first informant was Jim Pollard and this was the start of a lot of hard work, none of it paid for and I even had to buy the film The DOE paid for the tapes but film was always a problem. I remember one day ringing Tom Clarke who owned Silentnight, a local firm, which was the biggest manufacturer of mattresses in the world. I told him I needed some film and he sent his secretary Mrs Alice Tyldsley up in a chauffeur driven car to deliver £100 in notes. He didn’t even want a receipt. I’ve never forgotten that gesture, it made all the difference.

ORAL HISTORY JOURNAL
Volume 8, No. 2. Autumn 1980. pp48/52

THE LANCASHIRE TEXTILE PROJECT: a description of the work and some of the techniques involved by Stanley Graham

The Lancashire Textile Project which is funded by the Department of the Environment and based at Pendle Heritage Centre, Nelson, Lancashire, is engaged in gathering base research material on the technology of the Lancashire Cotton Industry using a combination of sound recording and photography. A secondary objective is to record the social history of the workers and to establish the links between work experience and the life of the community. This paper will describe some of the practical problems involved in starting such a project and give the solutions which were adopted in order to overcome them. We stress that what we describe is not definitive but is a scheme that works; the results the project has shown to date amply vindicate the methodology used. It is our hope that sharing our experience will encourage others to do the same. The first problem with any exercise of this sort is to decide what field to work in and what objects to pursue.

The fastest wasting historical resource in this country is the knowledge and experience of the old people who die every day. This is particularly true of the old technologies which in many cases have existed almost unchanged for the last 150 years but are now dying out. A few examples are riveting, chain-making, tinsmithing and iron-puddling. Awareness of this problem led us to consider what our priorities should be in this field. It seemed that perhaps too much effort had gone into collecting the artefacts and not enough into gathering technological data as to how these artefacts were used. Our prime local example was steam-driven weaving. In 1974 there were five such mills in the Pendle- Skipton area, at the time of writing there is one left. Having thus identified a need and an industry, we then had to ask ourselves what would be he best way of carrying out our project's aims, to make a record of what was important for the future. We had no previous experience of oral history and at this stage were particularly helped by the advice and criticism given to us by Dr. John Marshall, and also by Dr. Elizabeth Roberts, who allowed us to make use of the excellent schedule of social history questions which she had developed for her own researches in Barrow, Lancaster and Preston.

Our basic purpose was thus to seek to convey a body of highly technical information to people separated in time and place from the location where the information was generated. The first phase of the project was concerned with Bancroft Shed, Barnoldswick, which is now derelict; all the machinery has been scrapped, the building is in course of demolition and the workforce dispersed. The ideal solution would be to take future researchers to the mill and show the workforce operating the processes as a commercial operation as in the past but this is now clearly impossible. What can be done in such cases? Sadly the answer is usually, very little. However at Bancroft there was an alternative. Before the mill closed the Lancashire Textile Project did a thorough job of recording the processes and environment of the mill, using the techniques we will detail in this paper. The result is an excellent picture of the actual technology of the various processes and machines and also valuable evidence as to social links and impact on the local community. What we now seek to do is to interest other people in this approach and share the benefits of the experience we have gained in doing this work. The project carries on, and at the time of writing we are conducting a similar investigation into the hard waste condenser spinning industry. (The conversion of cotton thread waste into fibre and re-spinning into new yard using mule frames. By summer 1980 only two small firms will be left in operation.) What of the practical problems? What were they and how were they solved?

The first decision to be made was what form of presentation was going to be the most effective, both from the point of view of the actual recording and of the future researcher. The main channels by which we receive information are touch, sound and sight. How best can we use these channels to convey the body of knowledge to the researcher? We should pause here and realise that there are two very different contexts in which the material could be used. One is in the area of pure research, where a scholar needs to get everything he can out of an archive. Another is in the museum situation, where we wish to give a simplified version of the material to people to enable them to understand more about the exhibit they are looking at. Let us take this area first. Sense of texture and perhaps more important, scale, is best gained from the ability to see the artefacts themselves either in the museum context or on site. It is an advantage if they can be displayed in conditions as near as possible to the original environment. A loom, for instance, needs to be seen in a North light shed with whitewashed walls and a Rossendale flag floor to get an accurate idea of the conditions. If a recording of the roar of a weaving shed in full song could be played at the same time we would get another dimension. Having persuaded people what it looked like and sounded like we could introduce either a static exhibition of pictures or an audio visual display which put the worker into the picture and showed him or her actually working on the machine. This could be accompanied by excerpts from the tapes giving appropriate comments about the process and the work environment. I am sure that in these ways we could give a very accurate idea of what actually was going on in that shed. A pale imitation of the real thing admittedly, but far better than the usual sad display of static artefacts on polished floors or in showcases. But there remains the more difficult problem of the serious seeker after truth.

The researcher of the future will be looking for clear, factual, reliable and objective material presented in an accessible manner. A tall order indeed. Perhaps the quality which is most stressed in this context is objectivity. We believe that this is often over-stressed in the context of the individual whilst being important in the body as a whole. Can we then have lack of objectivity in the individual and retain it in the whole? We think so. Informants are human, and as such are going to be subjective whether we like it or not. This is a fact of life which we must learn to live with. We believe that this can be overcome by selectivity in the choice of informants. Individually, they must be articulate and technically knowledgeable, but also the overall aim should be a balanced view. There are two ways of approaching this problem. One is by horizontal spread of informants, that is, for example, to interview more than one weaver. The other is by vertical spread, in which we would interview the weaver and then the different executives in the chain of command. In the case of the weaver this would be the loom overlooker or tackler, the weaving manager, and then the top level management. These views would be followed by those of the observer, of which more in a moment. This is the pattern we have followed and in this way we feel we have achieved a balanced view of the subject we record.

Subjectivity is a sign of individuality, the people we interview are individuals first and workers second. Their individuality is part of the social pattern of the process and in this way we preserve it. The primary objective of the Project is the collection of technological information, but we value the connection between the work experience and the community at large. For this reason full social history interviews are done with the workers starting from earliest memories up to the present day. A structured interview is the aim, using a set list of questions which cover all aspects of experience. Some idea of the depth of this interview can be gained from the fact that it takes eight to ten ¾ hour interviews to complete the questions. The finished sound picture is a balanced, thorough investigation of the worker, his or her social life and task in industry. A vital part of this coverage is the manner in which we link the aural with the visual material.

The ideal way to learn about the process would be to stand at the worker's shoulder, watch the operations involved and ask questions at the same time. For various reasons this is impracticable and also intrusive but in effect this is exactly what we do using the 35mm. camera. The observer must study the process and define what he or she considers to be the definitive moments in this task. Then a series of monochrome pictures is made of these moments and presented to the informant as a folio of large, detailed prints which are clearly laid out and numbered in order. An interview is then conducted in which the informant is asked to describe exactly the process recorded on the pictures and can be questioned closely by the observer if anything of interest has not been mentioned.

The question always asked at this point is: 'Why use still pictures and not movie?'. The answer is two fold. First the fact that monochrome stills are the cheapest method, and second, movie would be useless because an informant will often want to spend perhaps ten or fifteen minutes describing one picture. (It is amazing how much information can be called from one image, and there are often interesting digressions which can cast valuable light on other matters.) If movie film is stopped the quality falls off dramatically, because it relies on shifting grain pattern for definition. Modern methods just being developed of high-definition video would be ideal, but expense rules this out at the moment.

It will be seen then that the end result is a series of tapes which describe the social life and technological aspects in very fine detail. If the same techniques are followed with all informants the net result is a consistent form of presentation which helps to give the researcher confidence in the source material. It soon becomes evident that even if there are faults, they are consistent, and comparisons between informants will be valid. One point which must be stressed here is that no editing is allowed for archival use. The evidence must be presented warts and all. The worst mistake we could make would be to pre-empt the judgement of the researcher and decide what is going to be of future interest We have no way of knowing this. What may seem to us to be a


useless digression may be a fascinating insight to a researcher in a hundred years. Remember that if we make tapes of good enough quality, they will not only be of interest to researchers into textile history but to linguists, sociologists, anthropologists and others.

An interesting point here is that it could well be worthwhile to include a series of tapes into the archive describing the rationale of the original researchers, how they were funded and what their aims were. One thing which I am sure will be interesting in a hundred years is how we actually got access to the mills in the first place. Surprisingly enough the question of access to the workplaces has never been a serious problem. Once one has convinced management that you are responsible and will not be disrupting his work force there is no problem.

It should however be mentioned here that the camera can be a most useful ally. The first stage is to acquaint oneself thoroughly with the stages of the process which is to be recorded. Many pictures can be done at this stage, which while not being part of the particular coverage of the process can be of great interest and very informative in setting the scene. Overall shots of departments, amenities, offices and exterior views all have their part to play. At the same time people are getting used to the sight of a person with a camera and act naturally. A judicious distribution of complimentary prints is the finest lubricant we have found. Pictures can be put up on the wall in the canteen or another suitable area and will create great interest. When the time comes to shoot the vital coverage of the process, which must be done during the course of the cycle of the operation in order to preserve continuity, (changes of dress etc are fatal), the observer is so unobtrusive as to be rendered almost invisible. It is courteous and very productive to give the management a set of prints which show different aspects of the factory, word soon gets round and if one wants access to another factory near by, a satisfied executive can be a very useful passport.

One word here about the use of flash or artificial lighting. This is undoubtedly a mistake. Available light only should be used for two reasons; one must not be intrusive, and the use of flash cuts off background detail and gives a false impression of the environment.

Such questions of technique also of course apply when recording sound. Open reel recording using the UHER has been the rule throughout. All tapes have been done at 3 ¾ IPS in stereo on tape approved by the Imperial War Museum. Tie pin microphones are preferred in static situations and quality has generally been of a very high order. No problems of any sort have been encountered with these methods. One word on the use of stereo. If care is used in spacing during interviews, good separation of tracks can be obtained, and this is invaluable during transcription when one track can be cut out during over talking, that is, when two people speak together. It is difficult to conceive of any major improvement that could be made in these methods without putting the cost up sharply.

Considerations of quality naturally lead us on to that most vexed of subjects, durability. When we started the project, we proposed an end date of a hundred years for the material as an ideal to be aimed at. This is relatively simple with the photographic materials, as we know by experience that properly processed and stored monochrome negative stock will last this length of time. The position is not so clear with recording tape. In truth nobody knows the answer to these questions, and 1 would submit that in the light of present knowledge the best way to preserve the material is to transcribe it onto good old fashioned paper and do three copies to be stored in separate locations. I would not care to enter the minefield of discussions about tape storage, except to state my personal opinion that it is a moot point whether tape should be rewound every year. There are very strong arguments for doing this every ten years, say in the case of masters. I have tape which has been left for over ten years, and is on the worst quality one could possibly use, but which shows no noticeable decline in quality. Perhaps the advance of technology will relieve us of this worry before long.

One of the main criteria of course is where the tape is stored and under what atmospheric conditions. Ideally the master tapes and transcripts should be stored in libraries or other similar public places in conditions of controlled temperature and humidity. These should be regarded as masters, and should not be used. The actual work of research should be done with copies. We are fortunate with the Lancashire Textile Project in that we have been offered a home for the material in the library of the University of Lancaster. This is we consider an ideal arrangement and one which augurs well for the uses it will be put to in the future.

However, before this can take place much work needs to be done in order to make the archive usable. The finest body of research work in the world is useless unless the information contained on it is readily accessible to the researcher. Whilst this statement is patently obvious, we would submit that this is the area which needs most attention in the field of Oral History today. The reasons for this is of course that the necessary processes, transcription and indexing are so expensive and time consuming. Transcription is essential both to safeguard the information by giving a permanent record and also to make the material easily accessible. It is far easier to find a page in a transcript than a two minute segment on a tape and any sound archivist will confirm the sad fact that tapes just will. not be used unless they are transcribed. We feel also that transcripts should be plainly marked at intervals with running time (5 minutes intervals) and digital count (units of 50). We recognise that all machines are different, but if the same type of machine is always used for transcription the count will be constant and can be transformed by simple formula for any other machine, by experiment.

Indexing is a formidable obstacle but one in which there may be a useful alternative. The accepted cross linked subject index can be a daunting task if one is faced with an archive of perhaps one million or two million words. There is however an alternative which although not as precise, can be of great value to researchers. In order to describe this method we must give a brief resume of how we deal with tapes once they are made. The master is copied immediately it is made on to reel to reel mono at 3 ¾ IPS. While this process is being carried out, the observer listens to the tape and notes down all proper names, technical terms and anything which may be helpful to the Transcriptionist. At the same time a note is made of sub headings in the tape, so that we finish up with an 'aid sheet' which is in effect a précis of much of the interesting information on the tape. This is invaluable to the Transcriptionist and can also be much more easily indexed than the complete transcript. The result would be an imperfect but fairly precise index, which could certainly lead researchers to areas of interest in the archive. The view has been expressed that this method could also be used in expanded form instead of the full transcript but we feel this would be dangerous. If funds allow, always transcribe as this means the archive is safe. However we are forced to admit that the 'aid sheet' method is preferable to no transcript at all.

Mention of funds brings us to another thorny problem. Who pays the money? The tailor must cut his coat to suit the cloth the old adage tells us, and projects like this are no exception to the rule. So often we must modify what would be the ideal in order to stay within the budget. There are two ways of looking at this. The methods we have set out are compatible with high quality at very low cost, once the initial capital equipment has been laid out. When compared with any other research effort, these methods are remarkably cost-effective in terms of the amount of information stored per unit of cost. They are also well suited to use by unskilled operators. The amateur historian, with a minimum of training, could well undertake a small project of this kind. One person can easily handle at surprising amount of taping and photography in the evenings. This in fact was how the Lancashire Textile Project started, we speak from experience. One can well envisage a project of this sort being regarded as an ideal educational exercise. Funding from educational sources could be a possibility. This is very much an area where local initiative could be used. Perhaps the most likely person to contribute would be the owner of the factory himself. Approach them and ask, surprising results can be obtained in this way. When the Lancashire Textile Project was in its infancy it was rescued twice in this way by local firms, Silentnight and Lontex Ltd. Without them the work would have stopped. Once again we speak from experience. 'Unto them that ask shall be given'. The field is wide open.

We are at a watershed in the industrial history of Britain, a critical moment when many of the old technologies which have unbroken links with the very roots of the industrial revolution are dying. As they die the artefacts vanish and the workers are dispersed to quietly fade away into the mists of history. We have the chance to record some of this experience before it fades away for ever, but that chance is fast fading as old workers die off. We may forgive posterity for the paucity of information left to us, but we ourselves shall not be judged so lightly by posterity. The time has come for the self-imposed boundaries between the social historian, the economic historian, the industrial archaeologist and the oral historian to be swept away, and for each to recognise the vital contribution that can be made by sensible recording techniques conscientiously applied. Given a minimum of direction and advice this is a field where the locally based enthusiast can do meaningful and essential work to the benefit of all disciplines, indeed in many cases is the only one who can help, as local knowledge is usually the key factor in recognising an opportunity and grasping it. There has never been an opportunity like the one we are faced with at the present in this country. Now is the time for action. The buck stops here.




NOTE: The Lancashire Textile Project was founded in 1974 by Stanley Graham, who from June 1973 to December 1978 was Mill Engineer at Bancroft Shed. He is at present reading History and Economic History at the University of Lancaster and is a founder member and trustee of the Bancroft Mill Engine Trust. The Lancashire Textile Project's staff consist of Stanley Graham (interviews and photography), Mary Hunter (interviews, indexing and general liaison) and Adrianne O'Brien (transcription). With the exception of Mrs. O'Brien and one year's full-time work by Stanley Graham, all work has been on a part-time basis. The Project's total cost to date has been approximately £14,000. Overall assessment and guidance has been provided by a Steering Committee (chaired by Dr. John Marshall) drawn from the Centre for North West Regional Studies, the sponsors, the researchers and Pendle Heritage Centre.

Stanley Graham will be one of the lecturers at a series of day schools on the practical techniques of gathering research material in local history which are planned for 1980-81 at Pendle Heritage Centre: for further information, contact The Director, Pendle Heritage Centre, Park Hill, Barrowford, Nelson, Lancashire.



SCG/23 February 2003

CRAVEN HERALD INDEX 1929–1966 Mill Entries

Earby

1932
25/03
Mill closures threatened.
4:3


08/04
Mill closures.
8:5


06/05
Sough Mill to be reopened?
4:2


03/06
Albion Mill to be reopened.
4:6


17/06
Sough Mill opens
4:3

1933
20/01
25 Years Ago. Grove Shed fire 1908.
6:5


24/02
Victoria Mill. Part to reopen.
4:6


26/05
Grove Shed to be sold.
4:7

1934
12/01
50 years Ago: Victoria Mill fire 1884.
6:5


23/03
Grove Shed occupied by R. Nutter and Company Ltd.
4:5

1935
05/04
25 Years Ago: Victoria Mill year long strike. 1910.
10:7


19/04
Knighthood for mill owner.
4:1-3


24/05
History of textiles 1885 - 1907.
4:1-2


08/11
50 years Ago: Gills shed opened. 1885.
9:6

1937
09/04
Victoria Shed to reopen.
5:2


03/09
25 Years Ago: Spring Mill fire. 1912.
9:2

1939
26/05
50 Years Ago: Victoria Mill Company made limited liability company. 1889.
4:2


21/07
50 Years Ago: Victoria Mill closed down. 1889.
4:1


27/10
50 Years Ago: Victoria Mill closed down again. 1889.
3:1

1940
28/06
Albion Shed opened 1889.
3:2

1941
23/05
50 Years Ago: Albion Shed explosion. 1891.
2:1

1945
30/11
Sough Mill. Engineering firm to take over.
7:5

1946
07/06
Grove Mill new industry.
7:2


28/06
Grove Mill new firm.
6:4

1947
11/04
Sough Bridge Mill. New tractor factory.
7:3

1950
29/09
Victoria Mill family bible found.
9:6

1957
29/11
Armoride buys Foulridge Mill.
12:3

1958
07/11
Victoria Mill. An assessment.
13:7

1961
26/05
Bristol Tractors. A change.
11:9

1962
05/10
Johnson fabrics renovating Victoria Mill.
13:7

1963
01/03
Victoria Mill. Should engine be preserved?
11:8-9

1964
16/10
Earby Light Engineers buy Dotcliffe Mill.
13:8-9

1966
30/09
Sough Mill to close.
13:1-2


















Kelbrook

1932
02/09
Sough Mill disorder.
4:1-2


07/10
Engineer Hoggarth suicide at Dotcliffe Mill.
8:5

1946
17/05
Dotcliffe Mill to reopen.
7:3

1960
23/12
Dotcliffe Mill bought by Bentham Tyre Machinery Company.
11:5












Salterforth

1929
29/03
James Slater Ltd. mill fire.
7:7

1948
31/12
Mill modernisation.
5:6












Barnoldswick

1930
12/09
New Road Manufacturing Company switches operations from Earby.
4:3


19/12
Bankfield Shed machinery auction.
4:2


26/02
Bankfield Shed to reopen.
4:5

1931
04/09
S. Pickles and Sons Ltd. Move to Long Ing Shed.
5:1


13/11
Alderton Brothers: Transfer (1932) from Fernbank Mill to Moss Shed.
5:2

1932
13/05
Long Ing Mill steam engine breakdown.
4:3


10/06
Sough Mill opens.
5:1


22/07
Clough Mill flood and recovery.
4:6

1933
10/03
County Brook Mill extended. Water power.
7:5


24/03
John Widdup and Sons Ltd. extension.
4:7

1934
04/05
Wellhouse Mill.
4:6

1935
01/02
Coates Mill dairy firm interest.
6:4


08/02
Coates Mill sold to Dobsons Dairies.
5:3


12/07
Wellhouse mill new tenants.
4:4


11/10
Wellhouse Mill new firm.
4:2

1937
28/05
50 Years Ago: Butts mill fire. 1887.
9:6


04/06
50 years Ago: Long Ing Shed extension opened. 1887.
9:1


03/09
Wellhouse Mill occupied by W. E. & D. Nutter.
5:2


05/11
Bankfield Shed photo.
6:3-5


12/11
Bankfield Shed new owners.
5:4


12/11
Clough Mill fire. Photo.
5:6-7
3:2-5

24/12
Wellhouse Mill fire.
5:3

1938
07/01
Long Ing Mill fire.
6:7


11/02
Bankfield Shed resold.
5:1


12/08
50 Years Ago: Long Ing Shed. Further shed to be added. 1888.
4:1


07/10
25 Years Ago. Hen House Shed to be built. 1913.
4:2


25/11
25 Years Ago: Crow Nest Shed flooded. 1913.
4:2

1939
07/07
25 Years Ago. Albion Shed boilers removed. 1914.
4:1


29/09
Wellhouse Mill machinery sold.
3:2


08/12
50 Years Ago: Calf Hall Shed opened. 1889.
4:2

1940
19/01
50 Years Ago: Butts Mill changes hands. 1890.
3:1


02/02
50 Years Ago: Mill opened. 1890.
3:1


02/02
Long Ing Shed fire.
3:4-5


09/02
E. Midgeley and Company leave Long Ing.
2:5


09/02
Long Ing Mill fire. Photo.
8:3-4


08/03
Butts Mill to reopen.
2:4


22/03
Long Ing Shed breakdown.
?


19/04
Long Ing fire.
2:4


03/05
Long Ing Shed. Proposal.
3:5


18/10
25 Years Ago: Butts Mill breakdown. 1915.
3:1


18/10
50 Years Ago: Clough Mill extension planned. 1890.
3:5


06/12
25 Years Ago: Fernbank Mill stoppage. 1915.
2:1

1941
19/12
Westfield Mill fire.
?

1945
13/07
‘Stew Mill’ – How it got its name. Part 1
2:4


20/07
‘Stew Mill’ – How it got its name. Part 2
2:4


31/08
Bankfield Shed. Its use.
7:3


07/12
Calf Hall Shed. New French company tenant.
2:6

1947
12/09
Bankfield Shed fire.
7:4


14/11
50 Years Ago: Butts Mill driving shaft breaks. 1897.
4:7

1948
14/05
Long Ing Shed. Electric looms.
5:5-6


28/05
25 Years Ago: Butts Mill fire. 1923.
2:8


25/06
Bancroft Mill. New owners.
5:4

1950
17/02
Butts Mill. Engineering firm to take over.
11:3


14/04
J. Slater and Company centenary.
9:1-2

1951
01/06
Wellhouse Mill. Mechanical damage.
7:7


09/11
Crow Nest Shed engine breakdown.
9:7


28/12
Corn Mill chimney to go.
7:5

1952
11/04
Cotton Trade: Mills to close.
9:3

1954
21/05
Ouzledale Foundry. Extensions opened.
11:1-2

1955
01/07
Butts Mill fire. Photo.
4:4-7
13:1-2

29/07
Long Ing Shed to close temporarily.
9:4


04/11
Wellhouse Mill to close.
11:5

1956
06/07
Clough Mill sold.
9:4


03/08
Wellhouse Mill to be vacated.
9:8


30/11
Clough Mill sold to Clarkes Mattressses.
13:2

1958
21/11
Fernbank Shed fire. Photos.
9:3-6

1959
13/02
Crow Nest Mill fire.
7:4-7
13:1-3

20/02
Fernbank Shed. P. Reed new firm.
11:4

1960
28/10
Wellhouse Mill. Engine terminated.
13:7


22/01
Silentnight plans for the future.
11:4

1961
14/07
J Sneath engineer since 1915. Photo.
6:4-6
11:8
1962
02/11
Westfield Mill to close.
11:5

1963
08/02
Fernbank Mill fire.
11:1-3


08/02
Westfield Mill. Dermide to take over.
11:4


22/02
Fernbank Mill to close.
11:1-2


05/07
Ouzledale Foundry. New large boiler.
11:7


09/08
Fernbank Mill to restart.
11:9

1964
07/02
Westfield Mill. Dermide development.
13:4


30/10
Silentnight Ltd. Photos.
9:3-6

1965
12/03
S. Pickles and Son. Merge with a Bradford firm.
13:5

1966
25/03
Crow Nest Shed modernising. Photo.
15:4-6


30/12
Crow Nest Shed engine to go. Photo.
9:4-6
11:7






































THE LANCASHIRE TEXTILE PROJECT

The LTP is an archive of 188 transcripts of interviews with workers who had knowledge of the textile industry in Barnoldswick (weaving) and Haslingden (spinning). It amounts to over 1,300,000 words and is supported by over 500 photographs. In addition there are two memoirs, one by the author Stanley Challenger Graham and the other by his father. These were included to give depth to the archive and demonstrate the efficacy of personal memoirs as tools of research.

The genesis of the project was an idea formulated by SCG when he was engineer at Bancroft Shed, Barnoldswick, in charge of the engine, boiler and general fabric of the mill. A campaign in 1978 of what can only be described as harassment in the corridors of power resulted in a collaboration between the Department of the Environment, The Centre for North West Regional Studies at Lancaster University and in the later stages, the Pendle Heritage Centre at Barrowford near Nelson.

All the interviews were done by SCG assisted in the later stages by Mrs Mary Hunter who finished the tapes dealing with spinning. In the early stages the project was supported almost entirely by the interviewers. Later there was heavy financial support by the DOE via Pendle Heritage in accomplishing the transcription of all the tapes. Timely cash help was given also by two firms in Barnoldswick, Silentnight and Lontex who pushed used notes into my hand to pay for essential expenses when the going got rough.

The analogue transcription was completed and the results archived in the library at Lancaster University but for over 25 years it sat there unused as due to it’s format and size it was virtually inaccessible. In 2000 SCG retired and spent three years re-transcribing all the tapes, editing them lightly, correcting mistakes and misapprehensions and adding notes based on the last 30 years research where appropriate. All the pictures were scanned and the result is capable of being accommodated in uncompressed form on a standard CD rom.

In March 2004 an enlightened friend, Dave O’Connor of Barnoldswick constructed a web site and put the whole of the LTP up on the Internet, freely accessible to anyone. The site is fully searchable and the whole of the LTP can be downloaded as a 26 MB Zip file. The address of the site is www.oneguyfrombarlick.co.uk
Please feel free to register on the site and download multiple copies for distribution to whoever you think may be interested. The more copies that exist in disparate locations, the better its chance of survival.

This accessibility raised the profile of the LTP and led to recognition of the work by Lancaster University and the Association for Industrial Archaeology. The hope is that this exposure will lead to more people becoming aware of the LTP and using the prime source information contained in it.
(Over)
The structure of the archive.

The basic intention of the project was to use interviews with workers to record all aspects of their life, social and economic history and record as comprehensively as possible their knowledge of the technology of the mill.

The social history interviews are based on the format of questions first drawn up by Dr Elizabeth Roberts of Lancaster University in her ground-breaking work in Barrow in Furness. The content of the technology segments of each informant’s interviews depended largely on the knowledge of the interviewer, SCG.

There are two sections in the LTP. The first and largest covers the weaving industry in Barnoldswick with particular reference to Bancroft Shed. The second is an examination of the Hard Waste Condenser Mule Spinning industry at Spring Vale Mill in Haslingden.

One of SCG’s original contributions to the structure of the project was to suggest making a series of pictures of definitive moments in each process and then getting the informant to describe exactly what he or she was doing. The result is a series of technical descriptions which are already being used by the Lancashire Textile Museum at Helmshore to train their demonstrators and produce interpretative material. This archive of approximately 500 pictures is part of the LTP and archived with the interviews.

We were always certain that what we had produced was of value, it is the most comprehensive description of the N E Lancs weaving sheds and the Hard Waste Condenser spinning industry ever attempted but the problem was that because of its size and scope it was impossible to access. Digitisation has transformed this situation, the archive can now be accommodated easily on any computer and searched. This accessibility has resulted in many more people becoming aware of the LTP and using it as a research tool. Please feel free to download the LTP and make multiple copies. Let other people know it is available and encourage them to do the same. There are no copyright restrictions on any of the material for educational or non-profit use.
If you have any questions about the LTP or suspect that I might be able to help or advise you in any way please do not hesitate to contact me.

SCG/09 August 2006

[Stanley]

This paper is a mine of useful research information.

[Stanley]

I freely admit that this is a rag bag of facts based on research but it's well worth a read, there is a lot of good stuff in here beyond Silentnight.

[PanBiker]

I think it should be mentioned that the original format of the LTP was visited again in 2012/13. Major improvements to the presentation structure were made by inserting all of the images into the relevant transcripts so that they now give proper visual context to the narrative rather than separate as they were previously.
Presentation from the site was also enhanced by making the new format more easily accessible. All the content of the project can still be freely accessed under it's current naming as The Lancashire Textile Project 2013. All information can be downloaded in various formats via the links provided. The project is accessed on this link:

The Lancashire Textile Project 2013

All the download options are here:

LTP2013 Downloads

[Stanley]

Thanks Ian.....