The British Multinational Enterprise in the United States before 1914: The Case of J. & P. Coats

Business History Review

Volumn 72, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 523-551

  Kim, Dong Woon ^a  

^a Dong Eui University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032282235     PISSN: 00076805     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/3116621     Document Type: Article

References (91)

1. America's share, estimated by J. H. Dunning, was 10.3 percent. Explaining International Production (London, 1988), 15. See also M. Wilkins, "Comparative Hosts," Business History 36:1 (1994): 20; G. Jones, The Evolution of International Business: An Introduction (London, 1996), 31. The United States also accounted for the largest portion, 15.8 percent, of the world total inward stock of foreign, both portfolio and direct, investment in 1914. M. Wilkins, The History of Foreign Investment in the United States to 1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1989), 145.
2. America's share, estimated by J. H. Dunning, was 10.3 percent. Explaining International Production (London, 1988), 15. See also M. Wilkins, "Comparative Hosts," Business History 36:1 (1994): 20; G. Jones, The Evolution of International Business: An Introduction (London, 1996), 31. The United States also accounted for the largest portion, 15.8 percent, of the world total inward stock of foreign, both portfolio and direct, investment in 1914. M. Wilkins, The History of Foreign Investment in the United States to 1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1989), 145.
3. America's share, estimated by J. H. Dunning, was 10.3 percent. Explaining International Production (London, 1988), 15. See also M. Wilkins, "Comparative Hosts," Business History 36:1 (1994): 20; G. Jones, The Evolution of International Business: An Introduction (London, 1996), 31. The United States also accounted for the largest portion, 15.8 percent, of the world total inward stock of foreign, both portfolio and direct, investment in 1914. M. Wilkins, The History of Foreign Investment in the United States to 1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1989), 145.
4. America's share, estimated by J. H. Dunning, was 10.3 percent. Explaining International Production (London, 1988), 15. See also M. Wilkins, "Comparative Hosts," Business History 36:1 (1994): 20; G. Jones, The Evolution of International Business: An Introduction (London, 1996), 31. The United States also accounted for the largest portion, 15.8 percent, of the world total inward stock of foreign, both portfolio and direct, investment in 1914. M. Wilkins, The History of Foreign Investment in the United States to 1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1989), 145.
5. According to C. Lewis, Britain's share was 46.4 percent. America's Stake in International Investments (Washington, D.C., 1938), 546. See also P. J. Buckley and B. R. Roberts, European Direct Investment in the USA Before World War I (London, 1982), 14. Similarly, Britain accounted for 59.9 percent of long-term foreign investments in the United States in 1914. Wilkins, The History, 159.
6. According to C. Lewis, Britain's share was 46.4 percent. America's Stake in International Investments (Washington, D.C., 1938), 546. See also P. J. Buckley and B. R. Roberts, European Direct Investment in the USA Before World War I (London, 1982), 14. Similarly, Britain accounted for 59.9 percent of long-term foreign investments in the United States in 1914. Wilkins, The History, 159.
7. According to C. Lewis, Britain's share was 46.4 percent. America's Stake in International Investments (Washington, D.C., 1938), 546. See also P. J. Buckley and B. R. Roberts, European Direct Investment in the USA Before World War I (London, 1982), 14. Similarly, Britain accounted for 59.9 percent of long-term foreign investments in the United States in 1914. Wilkins, The History, 159.
8. Wilkins, The History, 361. For individual industries invested in by British multinationals, see Wilkins, The History, 155-67, 350-82; M. Wilkins, "European Multinationals in the United States: 1815-1914" in Multinational Enterprise in Historical Perspective, eds A. Teichova et al. (Cambridge, U.K., 1986), 55-64; Lewis, America's Stake, 78-113, 562-7; Buckley and Roberts, European, 15, 43-84.
9. Wilkins, The History, 361. For individual industries invested in by British multinationals, see Wilkins, The History, 155-67, 350-82; M. Wilkins, "European Multinationals in the United States: 1815-1914" in Multinational Enterprise in Historical Perspective, eds A. Teichova et al. (Cambridge, U.K., 1986), 55-64; Lewis, America's Stake, 78-113, 562-7; Buckley and Roberts, European, 15, 43-84.
10. Wilkins, The History, 361. For individual industries invested in by British multinationals, see Wilkins, The History, 155-67, 350-82; M. Wilkins, "European Multinationals in the United States: 1815-1914" in Multinational Enterprise in Historical Perspective, eds A. Teichova et al. (Cambridge, U.K., 1986), 55-64; Lewis, America's Stake, 78-113, 562-7; Buckley and Roberts, European, 15, 43-84.
11. Wilkins, The History, 361. For individual industries invested in by British multinationals, see Wilkins, The History, 155-67, 350-82; M. Wilkins, "European Multinationals in the United States: 1815-1914" in Multinational Enterprise in Historical Perspective, eds A. Teichova et al. (Cambridge, U.K., 1986), 55-64; Lewis, America's Stake, 78-113, 562-7; Buckley and Roberts, European, 15, 43-84.
12. Wilkins, The History, 361. For individual industries invested in by British multinationals, see Wilkins, The History, 155-67, 350-82; M. Wilkins, "European Multinationals in the United States: 1815-1914" in Multinational Enterprise in Historical Perspective, eds A. Teichova et al. (Cambridge, U.K., 1986), 55-64; Lewis, America's Stake, 78-113, 562-7; Buckley and Roberts, European, 15, 43-84.
13. Dong-Woon Kim, "J. & P. Coats as a Multinational before 1914," Business and Economic History 26:2 (1997), 527. See also T. A. B, Corley, "Britain's Overseas Investments in 1914 Revisited," Business History 36:1 (1994), 73. As far as J. & P. Coats in the United States is concerned, Mira Wilkins suggests a valuable piece of information, especially on the rivalries between the company and its main competitors in the country's cotton thread market of oligopolistic nature after 1896. Also, J. B. K. Hunter describes the company's American businesses before the 1880s. For information on Coats, see: Kim, "J. & P. Coats as a Multinational"; Dong-Woon Kim, "J. & P. Coats in Tsarist Russia, 1889-1917," Business History Review 69 (Winter 1995); E. Harris, "J. & P. Coats in Poland" in Historical Studies in International Corporate Business, eds. A. Teichova et al. (Cambridge, U.K., 1989). See also Dong-Woon Kim, "From a Family Partnership to a Corporate Company: J. & P. Coats, Thread Manufacturers," Textile History 25:2 (1994).
14. Dong-Woon Kim, "J. & P. Coats as a Multinational before 1914," Business and Economic History 26:2 (1997), 527. See also T. A. B, Corley, "Britain's Overseas Investments in 1914 Revisited," Business History 36:1 (1994), 73. As far as J. & P. Coats in the United States is concerned, Mira Wilkins suggests a valuable piece of information, especially on the rivalries between the company and its main competitors in the country's cotton thread market of oligopolistic nature after 1896. Also, J. B. K. Hunter describes the company's American businesses before the 1880s. For information on Coats, see: Kim, "J. & P. Coats as a Multinational"; Dong-Woon Kim, "J. & P. Coats in Tsarist Russia, 1889-1917," Business History Review 69 (Winter 1995); E. Harris, "J. & P. Coats in Poland" in Historical Studies in International Corporate Business, eds. A. Teichova et al. (Cambridge, U.K., 1989). See also Dong-Woon Kim, "From a Family Partnership to a Corporate Company: J. & P. Coats, Thread Manufacturers," Textile History 25:2 (1994).
15. Dong-Woon Kim, "J. & P. Coats as a Multinational before 1914," Business and Economic History 26:2 (1997), 527. See also T. A. B, Corley, "Britain's Overseas Investments in 1914 Revisited," Business History 36:1 (1994), 73. As far as J. & P. Coats in the United States is concerned, Mira Wilkins suggests a valuable piece of information, especially on the rivalries between the company and its main competitors in the country's cotton thread market of oligopolistic nature after 1896. Also, J. B. K. Hunter describes the company's American businesses before the 1880s. For information on Coats, see: Kim, "J. & P. Coats as a Multinational"; Dong-Woon Kim, "J. & P. Coats in Tsarist Russia, 1889-1917," Business History Review 69 (Winter 1995); E. Harris, "J. & P. Coats in Poland" in Historical Studies in International Corporate Business, eds. A. Teichova et al. (Cambridge, U.K., 1989). See also Dong-Woon Kim, "From a Family Partnership to a Corporate Company: J. & P. Coats, Thread Manufacturers," Textile History 25:2 (1994).
16. Dong-Woon Kim, "J. & P. Coats as a Multinational before 1914," Business and Economic History 26:2 (1997), 527. See also T. A. B, Corley, "Britain's Overseas Investments in 1914 Revisited," Business History 36:1 (1994), 73. As far as J. & P. Coats in the United States is concerned, Mira Wilkins suggests a valuable piece of information, especially on the rivalries between the company and its main competitors in the country's cotton thread market of oligopolistic nature after 1896. Also, J. B. K. Hunter describes the company's American businesses before the 1880s. For information on Coats, see: Kim, "J. & P. Coats as a Multinational"; Dong-Woon Kim, "J. & P. Coats in Tsarist Russia, 1889-1917," Business History Review 69 (Winter 1995); E. Harris, "J. & P. Coats in Poland" in Historical Studies in International Corporate Business, eds. A. Teichova et al. (Cambridge, U.K., 1989). See also Dong-Woon Kim, "From a Family Partnership to a Corporate Company: J. & P. Coats, Thread Manufacturers," Textile History 25:2 (1994).
17. Dong-Woon Kim, "J. & P. Coats as a Multinational before 1914," Business and Economic History 26:2 (1997), 527. See also T. A. B, Corley, "Britain's Overseas Investments in 1914 Revisited," Business History 36:1 (1994), 73. As far as J. & P. Coats in the United States is concerned, Mira Wilkins suggests a valuable piece of information, especially on the rivalries between the company and its main competitors in the country's cotton thread market of oligopolistic nature after 1896. Also, J. B. K. Hunter describes the company's American businesses before the 1880s. For information on Coats, see: Kim, "J. & P. Coats as a Multinational"; Dong-Woon Kim, "J. & P. Coats in Tsarist Russia, 1889-1917," Business History Review 69 (Winter 1995); E. Harris, "J. & P. Coats in Poland" in Historical Studies in International Corporate Business, eds. A. Teichova et al. (Cambridge, U.K., 1989). See also Dong-Woon Kim, "From a Family Partnership to a Corporate Company: J. & P. Coats, Thread Manufacturers," Textile History 25:2 (1994).
18. Dong-Woon Kim, "J. & P. Coats as a Multinational before 1914," Business and Economic History 26:2 (1997), 527. See also T. A. B, Corley, "Britain's Overseas Investments in 1914 Revisited," Business History 36:1 (1994), 73. As far as J. & P. Coats in the United States is concerned, Mira Wilkins suggests a valuable piece of information, especially on the rivalries between the company and its main competitors in the country's cotton thread market of oligopolistic nature after 1896. Also, J. B. K. Hunter describes the company's American businesses before the 1880s. For information on Coats, see: Kim, "J. & P. Coats as a Multinational"; Dong-Woon Kim, "J. & P. Coats in Tsarist Russia, 1889-1917," Business History Review 69 (Winter 1995); E. Harris, "J. & P. Coats in Poland" in Historical Studies in International Corporate Business, eds. A. Teichova et al. (Cambridge, U.K., 1989). See also Dong-Woon Kim, "From a Family Partnership to a Corporate Company: J. & P. Coats, Thread Manufacturers," Textile History 25:2 (1994).
19. From 1830 to 1910, the U.S. population increased from 12.9 million to 92.0 million. More significant for J. & P. Coats's involvement in the country was the regional distribution. One-third of the population lived in the traditional small area of New England and adjacent states, which was initially the main market for the Coats thread with Boston, New York, and Philadelphia as its centers. Furthermore, the majority of total personal income was created by the northeastern states, including the New England area, whose per capita income was well over the national average. For population, see U.S. Bureau of Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, 1789-1945 (Washington, D.C., 1949), 25, 27. For information on the net national product, see L. E. Davis et al., American Economic Growth - An Economist's History of the United States (New York, 1972), 34.
20. From 1830 to 1910, the U.S. population increased from 12.9 million to 92.0 million. More significant for J. & P. Coats's involvement in the country was the regional distribution. One-third of the population lived in the traditional small area of New England and adjacent states, which was initially the main market for the Coats thread with Boston, New York, and Philadelphia as its centers. Furthermore, the majority of total personal income was created by the northeastern states, including the New England area, whose per capita income was well over the national average. For population, see U.S. Bureau of Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, 1789-1945 (Washington, D.C., 1949), 25, 27. For information on the net national product, see L. E. Davis et al., American Economic Growth - An Economist's History of the United States (New York, 1972), 34.
21. On spindles and raw cotton consumption, see B. R. Mitchell, International Historical Statistics - The Americas and Australasia (London, 1983), 472, 475; B. R. Mitchell, European Historical Statistics, 1750-1970 (London, abridged ed., 1978), 252-3, 255, 258; B. R. Mitchell and P. Deane, Abstract of British Historical Statistics (Cambridge, U.K., 1971), 179, 185; and D. North, "Industrialization in the United States" in The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, vol. VII, The Industrial Revolutions and After: Income, Population and Technological Change (II), eds. H. J. Habakkuk and M. Poston (Cambridge, U.K., 1965), 684. On cotton weaving and clothing industries, see North, "Industrialization in the United States," 682. On consumption of cotton goods, see E. W. Martin, The Standard of Living in 1860 - American Consumption Levels on the Eve of the Civil War (Chicago, 1942), 186.
22. On spindles and raw cotton consumption, see B. R. Mitchell, International Historical Statistics - The Americas and Australasia (London, 1983), 472, 475; B. R. Mitchell, European Historical Statistics, 1750-1970 (London, abridged ed., 1978), 252-3, 255, 258; B. R. Mitchell and P. Deane, Abstract of British Historical Statistics (Cambridge, U.K., 1971), 179, 185; and D. North, "Industrialization in the United States" in The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, vol. VII, The Industrial Revolutions and After: Income, Population and Technological Change (II), eds. H. J. Habakkuk and M. Poston (Cambridge, U.K., 1965), 684. On cotton weaving and clothing industries, see North, "Industrialization in the United States," 682. On consumption of cotton goods, see E. W. Martin, The Standard of Living in 1860 - American Consumption Levels on the Eve of the Civil War (Chicago, 1942), 186.
23. On spindles and raw cotton consumption, see B. R. Mitchell, International Historical Statistics - The Americas and Australasia (London, 1983), 472, 475; B. R. Mitchell, European Historical Statistics, 1750-1970 (London, abridged ed., 1978), 252-3, 255, 258; B. R. Mitchell and P. Deane, Abstract of British Historical Statistics (Cambridge, U.K., 1971), 179, 185; and D. North, "Industrialization in the United States" in The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, vol. VII, The Industrial Revolutions and After: Income, Population and Technological Change (II), eds. H. J. Habakkuk and M. Poston (Cambridge, U.K., 1965), 684. On cotton weaving and clothing industries, see North, "Industrialization in the United States," 682. On consumption of cotton goods, see E. W. Martin, The Standard of Living in 1860 - American Consumption Levels on the Eve of the Civil War (Chicago, 1942), 186.
24. On spindles and raw cotton consumption, see B. R. Mitchell, International Historical Statistics - The Americas and Australasia (London, 1983), 472, 475; B. R. Mitchell, European Historical Statistics, 1750-1970 (London, abridged ed., 1978), 252-3, 255, 258; B. R. Mitchell and P. Deane, Abstract of British Historical Statistics (Cambridge, U.K., 1971), 179, 185; and D. North, "Industrialization in the United States" in The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, vol. VII, The Industrial Revolutions and After: Income, Population and Technological Change (II), eds. H. J. Habakkuk and M. Poston (Cambridge, U.K., 1965), 684. On cotton weaving and clothing industries, see North, "Industrialization in the United States," 682. On consumption of cotton goods, see E. W. Martin, The Standard of Living in 1860 - American Consumption Levels on the Eve of the Civil War (Chicago, 1942), 186.
25. On spindles and raw cotton consumption, see B. R. Mitchell, International Historical Statistics - The Americas and Australasia (London, 1983), 472, 475; B. R. Mitchell, European Historical Statistics, 1750-1970 (London, abridged ed., 1978), 252-3, 255, 258; B. R. Mitchell and P. Deane, Abstract of British Historical Statistics (Cambridge, U.K., 1971), 179, 185; and D. North, "Industrialization in the United States" in The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, vol. VII, The Industrial Revolutions and After: Income, Population and Technological Change (II), eds. H. J. Habakkuk and M. Poston (Cambridge, U.K., 1965), 684. On cotton weaving and clothing industries, see North, "Industrialization in the United States," 682. On consumption of cotton goods, see E. W. Martin, The Standard of Living in 1860 - American Consumption Levels on the Eve of the Civil War (Chicago, 1942), 186.
26. On spindles and raw cotton consumption, see B. R. Mitchell, International Historical Statistics - The Americas and Australasia (London, 1983), 472, 475; B. R. Mitchell, European Historical Statistics, 1750-1970 (London, abridged ed., 1978), 252-3, 255, 258; B. R. Mitchell and P. Deane, Abstract of British Historical Statistics (Cambridge, U.K., 1971), 179, 185; and D. North, "Industrialization in the United States" in The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, vol. VII, The Industrial Revolutions and After: Income, Population and Technological Change (II), eds. H. J. Habakkuk and M. Poston (Cambridge, U.K., 1965), 684. On cotton weaving and clothing industries, see North, "Industrialization in the United States," 682. On consumption of cotton goods, see E. W. Martin, The Standard of Living in 1860 - American Consumption Levels on the Eve of the Civil War (Chicago, 1942), 186.
27. "The stitching of a shirt - back, front, sleeves, cuffs and collar, hemming, button holes, buttons, etc. - took a seamstress over 20 man hours; the [sewing] machine could perform the same task in as many minutes." A. Dorrnan, "A History of the Singer Company (U.K.) Ltd. (Clydebank Factory)," typescript (c. 1972), Glasgow University Archives, UGD 121/5/2, 8.
28. C. Head, Old Sewing Machines (Aylesbury, U.K., 1982), 6-15, 26; M. Wilkins, The Emergence of Multinational Enterprise: American Business Abroad from the Colonial Era to 1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1976), 37-8, 43; R. B. Davies, "'Peacefully Working to Conquer the World': The Singer Manufacturing Company in Foreign Markets, 1854-1889," Business History Review 43:3 (1969), 300-6; M. Blair, The Paisley Thread Industry (Paisley, U.K, 1907), 29-32.
29. C. Head, Old Sewing Machines (Aylesbury, U.K., 1982), 6-15, 26; M. Wilkins, The Emergence of Multinational Enterprise: American Business Abroad from the Colonial Era to 1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1976), 37-8, 43; R. B. Davies, "'Peacefully Working to Conquer the World': The Singer Manufacturing Company in Foreign Markets, 1854-1889," Business History Review 43:3 (1969), 300-6; M. Blair, The Paisley Thread Industry (Paisley, U.K, 1907), 29-32.
30. C. Head, Old Sewing Machines (Aylesbury, U.K., 1982), 6-15, 26; M. Wilkins, The Emergence of Multinational Enterprise: American Business Abroad from the Colonial Era to 1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1976), 37-8, 43; R. B. Davies, "'Peacefully Working to Conquer the World': The Singer Manufacturing Company in Foreign Markets, 1854-1889," Business History Review 43:3 (1969), 300-6; M. Blair, The Paisley Thread Industry (Paisley, U.K, 1907), 29-32.
31. C. Head, Old Sewing Machines (Aylesbury, U.K., 1982), 6-15, 26; M. Wilkins, The Emergence of Multinational Enterprise: American Business Abroad from the Colonial Era to 1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1976), 37-8, 43; R. B. Davies, "'Peacefully Working to Conquer the World': The Singer Manufacturing Company in Foreign Markets, 1854-1889," Business History Review 43:3 (1969), 300-6; M. Blair, The Paisley Thread Industry (Paisley, U.K, 1907), 29-32.
32. M. Walsh, "The Democratization of Fashion: The Emergence of the Women's Dress Pattern Industry," Journal of American History 66:2 (1979), 300-4, 307-8, 311.
33. S. Nicholas, "Agency Contracts, Institutional Modes, and the Transition to Foreign Direct Investment by British Manufacturing Multinationals before 1939," Journal of Economic History 43:3 (1983), 677; Wilkins, The Emergence, 207. Stephen Nicholas explained (pp. 679-86) the classic transition "from selling through agents to that through sales subsidiaries" by pre-1939 British manufacturing multinationals in terms of internalization theory: opportunism and contract monitoring were the major transaction costs. This theory is also applicable to J. & P. Coats. Such costs did exist in the first stage and this led to an agency system rather than internalization. See also Nicholas's other works on British multinational enterprises: "British Multinational Investment before 1939," Journal of European Economic History 11 (1982); "The Hierarchical Division of Labour and the Growth of British Manufacturing Multinationals: 1870-1939" in Multinational Enterprise, eds. Teichova et al.; "The Theory of Multinational Enterprise As a Transactional Mode" in Multinationals: Theory and History, eds. P. Hertner and G. Jones (Aldershot, U.K., 1986); and "Locational Choice, Performance and The Growth of British Multinational Firms," Business History 31:3 (1989).
34. S. Nicholas, "Agency Contracts, Institutional Modes, and the Transition to Foreign Direct Investment by British Manufacturing Multinationals before 1939," Journal of Economic History 43:3 (1983), 677; Wilkins, The Emergence, 207. Stephen Nicholas explained (pp. 679-86) the classic transition "from selling through agents to that through sales subsidiaries" by pre-1939 British manufacturing multinationals in terms of internalization theory: opportunism and contract monitoring were the major transaction costs. This theory is also applicable to J. & P. Coats. Such costs did exist in the first stage and this led to an agency system rather than internalization. See also Nicholas's other works on British multinational enterprises: "British Multinational Investment before 1939," Journal of European Economic History 11 (1982); "The Hierarchical Division of Labour and the Growth of British Manufacturing Multinationals: 1870-1939" in Multinational Enterprise, eds. Teichova et al.; "The Theory of Multinational Enterprise As a Transactional Mode" in Multinationals: Theory and History, eds. P. Hertner and G. Jones (Aldershot, U.K., 1986); and "Locational Choice, Performance and The Growth of British Multinational Firms," Business History 31:3 (1989).
35. S. Nicholas, "Agency Contracts, Institutional Modes, and the Transition to Foreign Direct Investment by British Manufacturing Multinationals before 1939," Journal of Economic History 43:3 (1983), 677; Wilkins, The Emergence, 207. Stephen Nicholas explained (pp. 679-86) the classic transition "from selling through agents to that through sales subsidiaries" by pre-1939 British manufacturing multinationals in terms of internalization theory: opportunism and contract monitoring were the major transaction costs. This theory is also applicable to J. & P. Coats. Such costs did exist in the first stage and this led to an agency system rather than internalization. See also Nicholas's other works on British multinational enterprises: "British Multinational Investment before 1939," Journal of European Economic History 11 (1982); "The Hierarchical Division of Labour and the Growth of British Manufacturing Multinationals: 1870-1939" in Multinational Enterprise, eds. Teichova et al.; "The Theory of Multinational Enterprise As a Transactional Mode" in Multinationals: Theory and History, eds. P. Hertner and G. Jones (Aldershot, U.K., 1986); and "Locational Choice, Performance and The Growth of British Multinational Firms," Business History 31:3 (1989).
36. S. Nicholas, "Agency Contracts, Institutional Modes, and the Transition to Foreign Direct Investment by British Manufacturing Multinationals before 1939," Journal of Economic History 43:3 (1983), 677; Wilkins, The Emergence, 207. Stephen Nicholas explained (pp. 679-86) the classic transition "from selling through agents to that through sales subsidiaries" by pre-1939 British manufacturing multinationals in terms of internalization theory: opportunism and contract monitoring were the major transaction costs. This theory is also applicable to J. & P. Coats. Such costs did exist in the first stage and this led to an agency system rather than internalization. See also Nicholas's other works on British multinational enterprises: "British Multinational Investment before 1939," Journal of European Economic History 11 (1982); "The Hierarchical Division of Labour and the Growth of British Manufacturing Multinationals: 1870-1939" in Multinational Enterprise, eds. Teichova et al.; "The Theory of Multinational Enterprise As a Transactional Mode" in Multinationals: Theory and History, eds. P. Hertner and G. Jones (Aldershot, U.K., 1986); and "Locational Choice, Performance and The Growth of British Multinational Firms," Business History 31:3 (1989).
37. S. Nicholas, "Agency Contracts, Institutional Modes, and the Transition to Foreign Direct Investment by British Manufacturing Multinationals before 1939," Journal of Economic History 43:3 (1983), 677; Wilkins, The Emergence, 207. Stephen Nicholas explained (pp. 679-86) the classic transition "from selling through agents to that through sales subsidiaries" by pre-1939 British manufacturing multinationals in terms of internalization theory: opportunism and contract monitoring were the major transaction costs. This theory is also applicable to J. & P. Coats. Such costs did exist in the first stage and this led to an agency system rather than internalization. See also Nicholas's other works on British multinational enterprises: "British Multinational Investment before 1939," Journal of European Economic History 11 (1982); "The Hierarchical Division of Labour and the Growth of British Manufacturing Multinationals: 1870-1939" in Multinational Enterprise, eds. Teichova et al.; "The Theory of Multinational Enterprise As a Transactional Mode" in Multinationals: Theory and History, eds. P. Hertner and G. Jones (Aldershot, U.K., 1986); and "Locational Choice, Performance and The Growth of British Multinational Firms," Business History 31:3 (1989).
38. S. Nicholas, "Agency Contracts, Institutional Modes, and the Transition to Foreign Direct Investment by British Manufacturing Multinationals before 1939," Journal of Economic History 43:3 (1983), 677; Wilkins, The Emergence, 207. Stephen Nicholas explained (pp. 679-86) the classic transition "from selling through agents to that through sales subsidiaries" by pre-1939 British manufacturing multinationals in terms of internalization theory: opportunism and contract monitoring were the major transaction costs. This theory is also applicable to J. & P. Coats. Such costs did exist in the first stage and this led to an agency system rather than internalization. See also Nicholas's other works on British multinational enterprises: "British Multinational Investment before 1939," Journal of European Economic History 11 (1982); "The Hierarchical Division of Labour and the Growth of British Manufacturing Multinationals: 1870-1939" in Multinational Enterprise, eds. Teichova et al.; "The Theory of Multinational Enterprise As a Transactional Mode" in Multinationals: Theory and History, eds. P. Hertner and G. Jones (Aldershot, U.K., 1986); and "Locational Choice, Performance and The Growth of British Multinational Firms," Business History 31:3 (1989).
39. Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 216 n. 5.
40. Andrew Coats, "From the Cottage to the Castle - A Personal Account of the Growth of J. & P. Coats," typescript (c. 1890), Coats Viyella plc Archives, HH/3/1, 32.
41. Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 189.
42. Wilkins, The History, 166, 361. See also Jones, The Evolution, 146.
43. Wilkins, The History, 166, 361. See also Jones, The Evolution, 146.
44. Coats, "From the Cottage," 32.
45. A. K. Cairncross and J. B. K. Hunter, "The Early Growth of J. & P. Coats, 1830-83," Business History 29:2 (1987): 158; Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 332; Hunter, "Archibald Coats," 329; Coats, "From the Cottage," 30-1.
46. A. K. Cairncross and J. B. K. Hunter, "The Early Growth of J. & P. Coats, 1830-83," Business History 29:2 (1987): 158; Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 332; Hunter, "Archibald Coats," 329; Coats, "From the Cottage," 30-1.
47. A. K. Cairncross and J. B. K. Hunter, "The Early Growth of J. & P. Coats, 1830-83," Business History 29:2 (1987): 158; Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 332; Hunter, "Archibald Coats," 329; Coats, "From the Cottage," 30-1.
48. A. K. Cairncross and J. B. K. Hunter, "The Early Growth of J. & P. Coats, 1830-83," Business History 29:2 (1987): 158; Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 332; Hunter, "Archibald Coats," 329; Coats, "From the Cottage," 30-1.
49. P. L. Payne, "The Emergence of the Large-Scale Company in Great Britain, 1870-1914," Economic History Review 20:3 (1967), 529-30; H. W. Macrosty, The Trust Movement in British Industry - A Study of Business Organisation (London, 1907), 126-47; J. H. Clapham, An Economic History of Modern Europe III (Cambridge, U.K., 1951), 224-6; Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 195-204.
50. P. L. Payne, "The Emergence of the Large-Scale Company in Great Britain, 1870-1914," Economic History Review 20:3 (1967), 529-30; H. W. Macrosty, The Trust Movement in British Industry - A Study of Business Organisation (London, 1907), 126-47; J. H. Clapham, An Economic History of Modern Europe III (Cambridge, U.K., 1951), 224-6; Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 195-204.
51. P. L. Payne, "The Emergence of the Large-Scale Company in Great Britain, 1870-1914," Economic History Review 20:3 (1967), 529-30; H. W. Macrosty, The Trust Movement in British Industry - A Study of Business Organisation (London, 1907), 126-47; J. H. Clapham, An Economic History of Modern Europe III (Cambridge, U.K., 1951), 224-6; Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 195-204.
52. P. L. Payne, "The Emergence of the Large-Scale Company in Great Britain, 1870-1914," Economic History Review 20:3 (1967), 529-30; H. W. Macrosty, The Trust Movement in British Industry - A Study of Business Organisation (London, 1907), 126-47; J. H. Clapham, An Economic History of Modern Europe III (Cambridge, U.K., 1951), 224-6; Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 195-204.
53. C. J. Schmitz, The Growth of Big Business in the United States and Western Europe, 1850-1939 (London, 1993), 39-40; J. F. Wilson, British Business History, 1720-1994 (Manchester, 1995), 14.
54. C. J. Schmitz, The Growth of Big Business in the United States and Western Europe, 1850-1939 (London, 1993), 39-40; J. F. Wilson, British Business History, 1720-1994 (Manchester, 1995), 14.
55. Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 186.
56. Ibid., 187.
57. Ibid., 186; Blair, The Paisley, 34-43, 54-61.
58. Ibid., 186; Blair, The Paisley, 34-43, 54-61.
59. Blair, The Paisley, 49.
60. According to Cairncross and Hunter, "By 1831 [J. & P. Coats was] already selling six-cord to a British merchant for export to the USA. Eight years later [the company] began selling direct to Parsons, Canning of New York." "The Early Growth," 158. By comparison, Hunter merely mentions, "... sales ... to a British merchant who exported to the USA, and later direct export to a New York merchant." "Thomas Coats," 332. However, they do not indicate where the information comes from; it seems probable that they were not aware of Andrew Coats's "From the Cottage," the main source for section II of this article.
61. According to Cairncross and Hunter, "By 1831 [J. & P. Coats was] already selling six-cord to a British merchant for export to the USA. Eight years later [the company] began selling direct to Parsons, Canning of New York." "The Early Growth," 158. By comparison, Hunter merely mentions, "... sales ... to a British merchant who exported to the USA, and later direct export to a New York merchant." "Thomas Coats," 332. However, they do not indicate where the information comes from; it seems probable that they were not aware of Andrew Coats's "From the Cottage," the main source for section II of this article.
62. According to Cairncross and Hunter, "By 1831 [J. & P. Coats was] already selling six-cord to a British merchant for export to the USA. Eight years later [the company] began selling direct to Parsons, Canning of New York." "The Early Growth," 158. By comparison, Hunter merely mentions, "... sales ... to a British merchant who exported to the USA, and later direct export to a New York merchant." "Thomas Coats," 332. However, they do not indicate where the information comes from; it seems probable that they were not aware of Andrew Coats's "From the Cottage," the main source for section II of this article.
63. Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 187, 191-2; Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 332-3.
64. Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 187, 191-2; Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 332-3.
65. "Historical Sketch," "Mill No.2," "Mill No.3," and "Mill No.4" in Illustrated Souvenir; Cairncross and Hunter, "The Early Growth," 161; Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 333.
66. "Historical Sketch," "Mill No.2," "Mill No.3," and "Mill No.4" in Illustrated Souvenir; Cairncross and Hunter, "The Early Growth," 161; Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 333.
67. "Historical Sketch," "Mill No.2," "Mill No.3," and "Mill No.4" in Illustrated Souvenir; Cairncross and Hunter, "The Early Growth," 161; Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 333.
68. A letter to H. Conant from J. & P. Coats, 25 Aug. 1881, Letter Book 1881-2, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/2/6. Wilkins says that Mill No. 5 was opened in 1881. The History, 362. The company records do not confirm this, but the new mules and combining machines may have been housed in the Mill.
69. A letter to H. Conant from J. & P. Coats, 25 Aug. 1881, Letter Book 1881-2, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/2/6. Wilkins says that Mill No. 5 was opened in 1881. The History, 362. The company records do not confirm this, but the new mules and combining machines may have been housed in the Mill.
70. "HistoricaI Sketch" and "Mill No.2" in Illustrated Souvenir; Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 333. The workforce in Paisley increased from eleven hundred in 1860 to three thousand persons by 1883. Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 194. According to Cairncross and Hunter, workers in Pawtucket numbered more than two thousand in 1883. "The Early Growth," 159. Wilkins refers, however, to the same number of workers with regard to the year of 1897. The History, 363.
71. "HistoricaI Sketch" and "Mill No.2" in Illustrated Souvenir; Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 333. The workforce in Paisley increased from eleven hundred in 1860 to three thousand persons by 1883. Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 194. According to Cairncross and Hunter, workers in Pawtucket numbered more than two thousand in 1883. "The Early Growth," 159. Wilkins refers, however, to the same number of workers with regard to the year of 1897. The History, 363.
72. "HistoricaI Sketch" and "Mill No.2" in Illustrated Souvenir; Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 333. The workforce in Paisley increased from eleven hundred in 1860 to three thousand persons by 1883. Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 194. According to Cairncross and Hunter, workers in Pawtucket numbered more than two thousand in 1883. "The Early Growth," 159. Wilkins refers, however, to the same number of workers with regard to the year of 1897. The History, 363.
73. "HistoricaI Sketch" and "Mill No.2" in Illustrated Souvenir; Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 333. The workforce in Paisley increased from eleven hundred in 1860 to three thousand persons by 1883. Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 194. According to Cairncross and Hunter, workers in Pawtucket numbered more than two thousand in 1883. "The Early Growth," 159. Wilkins refers, however, to the same number of workers with regard to the year of 1897. The History, 363.
74. "HistoricaI Sketch" and "Mill No.2" in Illustrated Souvenir; Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 333. The workforce in Paisley increased from eleven hundred in 1860 to three thousand persons by 1883. Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 194. According to Cairncross and Hunter, workers in Pawtucket numbered more than two thousand in 1883. "The Early Growth," 159. Wilkins refers, however, to the same number of workers with regard to the year of 1897. The History, 363.
75. On the basis of correspondence with Hunter, Wilkins says that "the investment" in the Conant Thread Company by J. & P. Coats increased from £21,000 in 1869 to £359,773 in 1876 and then to £566,343 in 1882. The History, 130, 362. But, she does not make it clear what the investment means. In the company records, "total balance," consisting of issued share capital and balance in current account, is recorded: £20,992, £359,772 and £566,343 in the three years. Private journals, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/4/2-3. Compare to Cairncross and Hunter, "The Early Growth," 170, 173. Most of the issued share capital presumably came from J. & P. Coats. On the other hand, Wilkins writes, "Coats's profits from its American business in the 1870s equaled over 90 percent of [J. & P. Coats's] total profits." The History, 362; compare with note 55 in this article. It is not, however, clear whether the business indicates that of the Conant Thread Company alone, or includes those of the American agencies. She also says that "in the early 1880s, the Pawtucket mills were equal in size to those of Coats at Paisley." The History, 814 n. 112. See also 366. But, it is not clear what the size indicates. The Pawtucket company was much smaller than J. & P. Coats in terms of total balance (in the early 1880s), property value (c. 1897, see Table 7), or capital (after the early 1880s; the former with about £770,000 [$3 million], 1890-1912 vs. the latter with £2 million in 1884, £3.7.5 million in 1890 and £5.5 million in 1896). "The Conant Thread Co." in J. & P. Coats, Investments 1890-1904, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/20/4 (hereafter, Investments 1) and J. & P. Coats, Investments 1896-1918, UGD 199/1/20/5 (hereafter, Investments 2); Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 194, 198. In terms of employment, however, J. & P. Coats and Clark & Co. had some three thousand workers each in Paisley and a comparable number of workers in their respective American mills in 1883. Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 3.33-4; compare to "John Clark," 326.
76. On the basis of correspondence with Hunter, Wilkins says that "the investment" in the Conant Thread Company by J. & P. Coats increased from £21,000 in 1869 to £359,773 in 1876 and then to £566,343 in 1882. The History, 130, 362. But, she does not make it clear what the investment means. In the company records, "total balance," consisting of issued share capital and balance in current account, is recorded: £20,992, £359,772 and £566,343 in the three years. Private journals, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/4/2-3. Compare to Cairncross and Hunter, "The Early Growth," 170, 173. Most of the issued share capital presumably came from J. & P. Coats. On the other hand, Wilkins writes, "Coats's profits from its American business in the 1870s equaled over 90 percent of [J. & P. Coats's] total profits." The History, 362; compare with note 55 in this article. It is not, however, clear whether the business indicates that of the Conant Thread Company alone, or includes those of the American agencies. She also says that "in the early 1880s, the Pawtucket mills were equal in size to those of Coats at Paisley." The History, 814 n. 112. See also 366. But, it is not clear what the size indicates. The Pawtucket company was much smaller than J. & P. Coats in terms of total balance (in the early 1880s), property value (c. 1897, see Table 7), or capital (after the early 1880s; the former with about £770,000 [$3 million], 1890-1912 vs. the latter with £2 million in 1884, £3.7.5 million in 1890 and £5.5 million in 1896). "The Conant Thread Co." in J. & P. Coats, Investments 1890-1904, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/20/4 (hereafter, Investments 1) and J. & P. Coats, Investments 1896-1918, UGD 199/1/20/5 (hereafter, Investments 2); Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 194, 198. In terms of employment, however, J. & P. Coats and Clark & Co. had some three thousand workers each in Paisley and a comparable number of workers in their respective American mills in 1883. Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 3.33-4; compare to "John Clark," 326.
77. On the basis of correspondence with Hunter, Wilkins says that "the investment" in the Conant Thread Company by J. & P. Coats increased from £21,000 in 1869 to £359,773 in 1876 and then to £566,343 in 1882. The History, 130, 362. But, she does not make it clear what the investment means. In the company records, "total balance," consisting of issued share capital and balance in current account, is recorded: £20,992, £359,772 and £566,343 in the three years. Private journals, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/4/2-3. Compare to Cairncross and Hunter, "The Early Growth," 170, 173. Most of the issued share capital presumably came from J. & P. Coats. On the other hand, Wilkins writes, "Coats's profits from its American business in the 1870s equaled over 90 percent of [J. & P. Coats's] total profits." The History, 362; compare with note 55 in this article. It is not, however, clear whether the business indicates that of the Conant Thread Company alone, or includes those of the American agencies. She also says that "in the early 1880s, the Pawtucket mills were equal in size to those of Coats at Paisley." The History, 814 n. 112. See also 366. But, it is not clear what the size indicates. The Pawtucket company was much smaller than J. & P. Coats in terms of total balance (in the early 1880s), property value (c. 1897, see Table 7), or capital (after the early 1880s; the former with about £770,000 [$3 million], 1890-1912 vs. the latter with £2 million in 1884, £3.7.5 million in 1890 and £5.5 million in 1896). "The Conant Thread Co." in J. & P. Coats, Investments 1890-1904, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/20/4 (hereafter, Investments 1) and J. & P. Coats, Investments 1896-1918, UGD 199/1/20/5 (hereafter, Investments 2); Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 194, 198. In terms of employment, however, J. & P. Coats and Clark & Co. had some three thousand workers each in Paisley and a comparable number of workers in their respective American mills in 1883. Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 3.33-4; compare to "John Clark," 326.
78. On the basis of correspondence with Hunter, Wilkins says that "the investment" in the Conant Thread Company by J. & P. Coats increased from £21,000 in 1869 to £359,773 in 1876 and then to £566,343 in 1882. The History, 130, 362. But, she does not make it clear what the investment means. In the company records, "total balance," consisting of issued share capital and balance in current account, is recorded: £20,992, £359,772 and £566,343 in the three years. Private journals, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/4/2-3. Compare to Cairncross and Hunter, "The Early Growth," 170, 173. Most of the issued share capital presumably came from J. & P. Coats. On the other hand, Wilkins writes, "Coats's profits from its American business in the 1870s equaled over 90 percent of [J. & P. Coats's] total profits." The History, 362; compare with note 55 in this article. It is not, however, clear whether the business indicates that of the Conant Thread Company alone, or includes those of the American agencies. She also says that "in the early 1880s, the Pawtucket mills were equal in size to those of Coats at Paisley." The History, 814 n. 112. See also 366. But, it is not clear what the size indicates. The Pawtucket company was much smaller than J. & P. Coats in terms of total balance (in the early 1880s), property value (c. 1897, see Table 7), or capital (after the early 1880s; the former with about £770,000 [$3 million], 1890-1912 vs. the latter with £2 million in 1884, £3.7.5 million in 1890 and £5.5 million in 1896). "The Conant Thread Co." in J. & P. Coats, Investments 1890-1904, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/20/4 (hereafter, Investments 1) and J. & P. Coats, Investments 1896-1918, UGD 199/1/20/5 (hereafter, Investments 2); Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 194, 198. In terms of employment, however, J. & P. Coats and Clark & Co. had some three thousand workers each in Paisley and a comparable number of workers in their respective American mills in 1883. Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 3.33-4; compare to "John Clark," 326.
79. On the basis of correspondence with Hunter, Wilkins says that "the investment" in the Conant Thread Company by J. & P. Coats increased from £21,000 in 1869 to £359,773 in 1876 and then to £566,343 in 1882. The History, 130, 362. But, she does not make it clear what the investment means. In the company records, "total balance," consisting of issued share capital and balance in current account, is recorded: £20,992, £359,772 and £566,343 in the three years. Private journals, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/4/2-3. Compare to Cairncross and Hunter, "The Early Growth," 170, 173. Most of the issued share capital presumably came from J. & P. Coats. On the other hand, Wilkins writes, "Coats's profits from its American business in the 1870s equaled over 90 percent of [J. & P. Coats's] total profits." The History, 362; compare with note 55 in this article. It is not, however, clear whether the business indicates that of the Conant Thread Company alone, or includes those of the American agencies. She also says that "in the early 1880s, the Pawtucket mills were equal in size to those of Coats at Paisley." The History, 814 n. 112. See also 366. But, it is not clear what the size indicates. The Pawtucket company was much smaller than J. & P. Coats in terms of total balance (in the early 1880s), property value (c. 1897, see Table 7), or capital (after the early 1880s; the former with about £770,000 [$3 million], 1890-1912 vs. the latter with £2 million in 1884, £3.7.5 million in 1890 and £5.5 million in 1896). "The Conant Thread Co." in J. & P. Coats, Investments 1890-1904, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/20/4 (hereafter, Investments 1) and J. & P. Coats, Investments 1896-1918, UGD 199/1/20/5 (hereafter, Investments 2); Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 194, 198. In terms of employment, however, J. & P. Coats and Clark & Co. had some three thousand workers each in Paisley and a comparable number of workers in their respective American mills in 1883. Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 3.33-4; compare to "John Clark," 326.
80. On the basis of correspondence with Hunter, Wilkins says that "the investment" in the Conant Thread Company by J. & P. Coats increased from £21,000 in 1869 to £359,773 in 1876 and then to £566,343 in 1882. The History, 130, 362. But, she does not make it clear what the investment means. In the company records, "total balance," consisting of issued share capital and balance in current account, is recorded: £20,992, £359,772 and £566,343 in the three years. Private journals, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/4/2-3. Compare to Cairncross and Hunter, "The Early Growth," 170, 173. Most of the issued share capital presumably came from J. & P. Coats. On the other hand, Wilkins writes, "Coats's profits from its American business in the 1870s equaled over 90 percent of [J. & P. Coats's] total profits." The History, 362; compare with note 55 in this article. It is not, however, clear whether the business indicates that of the Conant Thread Company alone, or includes those of the American agencies. She also says that "in the early 1880s, the Pawtucket mills were equal in size to those of Coats at Paisley." The History, 814 n. 112. See also 366. But, it is not clear what the size indicates. The Pawtucket company was much smaller than J. & P. Coats in terms of total balance (in the early 1880s), property value (c. 1897, see Table 7), or capital (after the early 1880s; the former with about £770,000 [$3 million], 1890-1912 vs. the latter with £2 million in 1884, £3.7.5 million in 1890 and £5.5 million in 1896). "The Conant Thread Co." in J. & P. Coats, Investments 1890-1904, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/20/4 (hereafter, Investments 1) and J. & P. Coats, Investments 1896-1918, UGD 199/1/20/5 (hereafter, Investments 2); Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 194, 198. In terms of employment, however, J. & P. Coats and Clark & Co. had some three thousand workers each in Paisley and a comparable number of workers in their respective American mills in 1883. Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 3.33-4; compare to "John Clark," 326.
81. On the basis of correspondence with Hunter, Wilkins says that "the investment" in the Conant Thread Company by J. & P. Coats increased from £21,000 in 1869 to £359,773 in 1876 and then to £566,343 in 1882. The History, 130, 362. But, she does not make it clear what the investment means. In the company records, "total balance," consisting of issued share capital and balance in current account, is recorded: £20,992, £359,772 and £566,343 in the three years. Private journals, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/4/2-3. Compare to Cairncross and Hunter, "The Early Growth," 170, 173. Most of the issued share capital presumably came from J. & P. Coats. On the other hand, Wilkins writes, "Coats's profits from its American business in the 1870s equaled over 90 percent of [J. & P. Coats's] total profits." The History, 362; compare with note 55 in this article. It is not, however, clear whether the business indicates that of the Conant Thread Company alone, or includes those of the American agencies. She also says that "in the early 1880s, the Pawtucket mills were equal in size to those of Coats at Paisley." The History, 814 n. 112. See also 366. But, it is not clear what the size indicates. The Pawtucket company was much smaller than J. & P. Coats in terms of total balance (in the early 1880s), property value (c. 1897, see Table 7), or capital (after the early 1880s; the former with about £770,000 [$3 million], 1890-1912 vs. the latter with £2 million in 1884, £3.7.5 million in 1890 and £5.5 million in 1896). "The Conant Thread Co." in J. & P. Coats, Investments 1890-1904, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/20/4 (hereafter, Investments 1) and J. & P. Coats, Investments 1896-1918, UGD 199/1/20/5 (hereafter, Investments 2); Kim, "From a Family Partnership," 194, 198. In terms of employment, however, J. & P. Coats and Clark & Co. had some three thousand workers each in Paisley and a comparable number of workers in their respective American mills in 1883. Hunter, "Thomas Coats," 3.33-4; compare to "John Clark," 326.
82. Meetings, 25 Aug., 30 Oct. 1896, 25 Feb. 1897, Book 2.
83. Finance Committee meeting, 28 Sept. 1899, Finance Committee Minute Book 1; Meetings, 29 Mar., 7 June 1900, Book 2; 30 Aug. 1916, Book 3.
84. Macrosty, The Trust Movement, 129-30; Moody, The Truth, 234-5; J. & P. Coats, annual report, 1898, Company Registration Office, Edinburgh, SC2042. The formation of the American Thread Company was arranged by John Dos Passos, an American attorney. Wilkins, The History, 364. In 1900, he also attempted to combine silk sewing companies. Meetings, 28 Aug. 1900, 14 Mar. 1901, Book 2.
85. Macrosty, The Trust Movement, 129-30; Moody, The Truth, 234-5; J. & P. Coats, annual report, 1898, Company Registration Office, Edinburgh, SC2042. The formation of the American Thread Company was arranged by John Dos Passos, an American attorney. Wilkins, The History, 364. In 1900, he also attempted to combine silk sewing companies. Meetings, 28 Aug. 1900, 14 Mar. 1901, Book 2.
86. Macrosty, The Trust Movement, 129-30; Moody, The Truth, 234-5; J. & P. Coats, annual report, 1898, Company Registration Office, Edinburgh, SC2042. The formation of the American Thread Company was arranged by John Dos Passos, an American attorney. Wilkins, The History, 364. In 1900, he also attempted to combine silk sewing companies. Meetings, 28 Aug. 1900, 14 Mar. 1901, Book 2.
87. Macrosty, The Trust Movement, 131; S. N. Whitney, Antitrust Policies - American Experience in Twenty Industries, vol. 1 (New York, 1958), 528; Wilkins, The History, 366; chairman's speech, J. & P. Coats, annual general meeting, 29 Nov. 1906, Book 3. According to Willdns, "Estimates of American Thread Company's market share in 1901 ranged from a little less than one-third ... to about 50 percent ... Coats was said to have one-third" The History, 814 n. 105.
88. Macrosty, The Trust Movement, 131; S. N. Whitney, Antitrust Policies - American Experience in Twenty Industries, vol. 1 (New York, 1958), 528; Wilkins, The History, 366; chairman's speech, J. & P. Coats, annual general meeting, 29 Nov. 1906, Book 3. According to Willdns, "Estimates of American Thread Company's market share in 1901 ranged from a little less than one-third ... to about 50 percent ... Coats was said to have one-third" The History, 814 n. 105.
89. Macrosty, The Trust Movement, 131; S. N. Whitney, Antitrust Policies - American Experience in Twenty Industries, vol. 1 (New York, 1958), 528; Wilkins, The History, 366; chairman's speech, J. & P. Coats, annual general meeting, 29 Nov. 1906, Book 3. According to Willdns, "Estimates of American Thread Company's market share in 1901 ranged from a little less than one-third ... to about 50 percent ... Coats was said to have one-third" The History, 814 n. 105.
90. Macrosty, The Trust Movement, 131; S. N. Whitney, Antitrust Policies - American Experience in Twenty Industries, vol. 1 (New York, 1958), 528; Wilkins, The History, 366; chairman's speech, J. & P. Coats, annual general meeting, 29 Nov. 1906, Book 3. According to Willdns, "Estimates of American Thread Company's market share in 1901 ranged from a little less than one-third ... to about 50 percent ... Coats was said to have one-third" The History, 814 n. 105.
91. Meeting, 17 July 1907, Book 3.