Oil on the water: Government regulation of a carcinogen in the twentieth-century Lancashire cotton spinning industry

Abstract

In the Lancashire cotton textile industry, mule spinners were prone to a chronic and sometimes fatal skin cancer (often affecting the groin). The disease had reached epidemic proportions by the 1920s, which necessitated action by the government, employers, and trade unions. In contrast to previous accounts, this article focuses on the government's reaction to mule spinners' cancer. Using official records in the National Archives, the slow introduction of health and safety measures by the government is explored in detail. Although obstructionism by the employers played a key role, one of the reasons for government inaction was the ambiguity of scientific research on engineering oils. On the other hand, prolonged scientific research suited a government policy that was framed around self regulation – a policy that had proved largely ineffective by the 1950s.

Keywords:

• epithelioma
• industrial cancer
• occupational health
• self-regulation

Notes

 1. Charles Schofield to H. Hynd MP, 3 November 1952. ACS records, John Rylands Library [JRL], Deansgate, Manchester.

 2. Calculated from Robson (1957, Table 16, p. 355). Following the Cotton Industry Act (1959), which provided a subsidy for the scrapping of excess capacity, rings rapidly replaced mules in the spinning industry.

 3. National Archives (hereinafter, NA), PIN 12/33, Robertson, ‘An Enquiry’, March 1926, p. 20.

 4. Ibid., p. 21.

 5. NA, PIN 12/33, 388800/53, Report and statistical tables as to epitheliomatous ulceration, and observations on the Workmen's Compensation Schedule, 3 March 1927, p. 3.

 6. County Court Decision: Workmen's Compensation Act. Medical Officer, 13 November 1924.

 7. NA, PIN 12/62. This Order extended the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1925 (15 & 16 Geo.5. c.84) and specified various conditions (such as undergoing medical examinations) governing payment of compensation.

 8. JRL ACS/6/7/10. File on John Bolton (1906–74), a spinner who died from scrotal cancer. His final letter to the ACS, 29 November 1973, reads: ‘I try to keep cheerful, but I wonder were [sic] it [will] end after all this time’.

 9. NA, FD1/2072, 2 January 1925.

10. MRC, Investigation.

11. NA, FD1/2072, letter to Legge, 6 February 1925; letter to Leitch, 11 February 1925.

12. JRL, Reports of Manchester Cancer Committee.

13. Representatives of the textile machinery makers included Dobson & Barlow Ltd, Asa Lees & Co. Ltd, and Platt Bros & Co. Ltd. Fred Birchenough, Henry Boothman, and William Wood gave evidence on behalf of the ACS.

14. NA, FD1/2072, 2 January 1925, p. 6.

15. NA, PIN 12/33, letter to Chief Inspector of Factories, 2 January 1925, p. 7.

16. Ibid., Minute to Anderson, 15 January 1925; letter to Veale, 28 February 1925; letter to prospective committee member, 4 March 1925 (emphasis added).

17. NA/388.800. ‘Mule spinners' cancer – oil research’, 1 November 1927.

18. Ibid., pp. 20–22.

19. NA, PIN 12/33, ‘Mule spinners' cancer’, Report of meeting of the Mule Spinners' Cancer Committee, 22 November 1926.

20. Ibid.

21. This figure is based on the market capitalisation for 1919. Calculated from Hannah (1983, Table A5, p. 189). It seems that the amounts being paid in compensation exceeded the costs of examination. Holroyd (FMCSA) alleged that the employers were already paying £5000 per annum in compensation, which was equivalent to 830 mills. NA PIN 12/33, Mule Spinners' Cancer Committee, 6 December 1926, p. 2.

22. Ibid., Report of meeting of the Mule Spinners' Cancer Committee, 6 December 1926, p. 2.

23. Ibid., Report of meeting of the Mule Spinners' Cancer Committee, 4 April 1927, pp. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9; ibid., Henry to Bridge, 27 April 1928.

24. Ibid., ‘Mule spinners' cancer’, Minute dated 31 May 1927.

25. Ibid., 4 April 1927, p. 6.

26. Ibid., An enquiry in regard to the cause of spinners' scrotal cancer, March 1926, p. 25.

27. Hansard, 15 July 1927. Howarth, one of the FMCSA's negotiators directly attributed epithelioma to the use of braces rather than belts at a meeting of the Mule Spinners' Cancer Committee. NA, PIN. 12/33, ‘Mule spinners' cancer’, Report of meeting of the Mule Spinners' Cancer Committee, 4 April 1927. Later evidence stated that he had, ‘been trying in every possible way to discredit the findings of the committee as to the cause of the disease’. NA, PIN 12/33, Minute dated 25 July 1927.

28. Ibid., p. 14.

29. Ibid., p. 20.

30. NA, FD1/2072, Cotton industry cancer, Tizard to Fletcher, 19 May 1926; Tizard to Thomson, 29 May 1926; Tizard to Fletcher, 3 February 1927.

31. Ibid., Tizard to Thomson, 29 May 1926.

32. NA, PIN 12/33/388800/53, Report and statistical tables as to incidence of epitheliomatous ulceration, and observations on the Workmen's Compensation Schedule, 3 March 1927, p. 10.

33. NA, FD1/2072, Thomson to Tizard, 16 June 1926.

34. Ibid., Leitch to Tizard, 27 April 1928.

35. NA, FDI/2072, Cotton industry cancer, letter to Fletcher (MRC), 3 February 1927; DSIR to Thomson, 2 April 1928.

36. Ibid., Mule spinners cancer, 10 May 1928; Tizard to Fletcher, 9 May 1928.

37. JRL, MCC report, 1932–33, and 1934 (1934).

38. NA, FD1/2072, DSIR to Thomson, 13 August 1926. The issue of whether the Twort team was suitable was raised again in September when the DISR informed the MRC that it was not prepared to begin preliminary research to discover a safe spindle oil until the competence of the Twort team had been established. Ibid., DSIR to Thomson, 29 September 1926.

39. Ibid., letter to Tizard, 6 October 1926. Comparing his own researchers (Leitch and Kennaway), with Twort, Thomson further opined, ‘the results obtained by Leitch can be depended upon in a way I think should be impossible for some time at least with the results got by Twort’. Ibid. The need for government testing independently of Twort was reiterated early in 1927. Ibid., Tizard to Fletcher, 3 February 1927.

40. Ibid., MRC to Twort, 21 December 1928. In an earlier communication it was recognised in official circles that if a non-mineral oil was found to be innocuous its compulsory use might, ‘be a burden upon industry’. Ibid., Leitch to Tizard, 3 April 1928.

41 JRL, MCC report .. for the year 1928 (Manchester, 1928).

42. NA, PIN 12/33, letter to Chief Inspector of Factories, 2 January 1925, p. 7.

43. Kennaway was director of the Chester Beatty Institute (1928–46), and by 1930 had identified the carcinogens in coal tar.

44. NA, FD1/2072, Minutes of conversation involving Leitch and Kennaway, 28 June 1928.

45. JRL, Report of the Manchester Committee on Cancer, 1932–33 and 1934 (Manchester, 1934), p. 6.

46. JRL, Report of the Manchester Committee on Cancer, 1932–33 and 1934 (Manchester, 1934). The lubricants used in mule spinning were regarded generally the most carcinogenic of all oils used in industry – including those used in internal combustion engines.

47. Ibid., p. 15.

48. NA, FD1/2072, Mellanby to Twort, 24 April 1934; Mellanby to Greenwood, 20 February 1934.

49. NA, FD1/2072, Veitch Clark (MCC) to Bridge, 4 April 1934; Home Office to MRC, 17 April 1934.

50. Ibid., Mellanby to Bridge, 6 June 1934, pp. 3–5.

51. Ibid.

52. Ibid., Minute by Mellanby, n.d.

53. NA FD1/2073, Leitch to Bridge, 13 December 1935.

54. Ibid., Bridge to Chief Inspector of Factories, 10 May 1939.

55. Ibid.

56. JRL ACS/6/7/4. Schofield (?) to S.J. Auld, 22 July 1950.

57. JRL ACS/6/7/6. Schofield (?) to H. Hynd MP, 10 October 1952.

58. JRL ACS/6/7/6. C. Henniker-Heaton (FMCSA) to H. Gregson, HM Inspector of Factories, Wigan, 29 November 1952.

59. JRL ACS/6/7/6. C. Schofield to K.G. Mackenzie, The Texas Company, New York, 8 October 1953.

60. JRL ACS/6/7/6. C. Schofield to R. Murray, 14 March 1957.

61. For the periods 1961–65, and 1966–70, rings averaged 83% and 96%, respectively, of total spinning capacity in Lancashire. Calculated from the Cotton Board Quarterly Statistical Review (various issues).

62. R. Murray, ‘The Prevention of Industrial Diseases’, lecture 18 May 1951. Copy in JRL ACS/6/7/6.