Abstract
This dissertation aims to discover if the rise of the working-class woman shopper in interwar Liverpool led to a culture of abundance by using a socio-economic approach to the research. The thesis is divided into four chapters. While this study focuses on the rise of the working-class woman shopper, the first chapter explains why Liverpool changed from a predominantly maritime city to a place that encouraged mass consumerism. There is also discussion on the mass production of garments and the effects this had on the smaller retailers. Women’s interest in Hollywood glamour is also discussed to show how cultural changes influenced the shopping experience. Using an autobiographical account from the Chairman of Lewis’s Department Store, Frederick Marquis, provides evidence to support the retail changes that were put in place by store managers to attract working-class women into their department stores. Overall, this study shows how consumerism and culture were transformed within the interwar period and how societal changes led to working-class women’s interest in modernity and consumerism.
Introduction
Retailing between the wars in Liverpool rapidly changed. From the single independent shops that mostly supplied consumer goods to their middle-class customers, to large department stores that focused on mass producing goods to a wider consumer base. Selling products under one roof became convenient for the shopper, with the rise of cheaper consumer goods, which was made possible through the mass production of goods. However, because of the financial recession during the 1930s consumer behaviour varied. One of the reason for this can be found in the economic failures at the Port of Liverpool and with the lack of employment available for many dock workers. The docks, once flourishing, now caused many men into a cycle of casualisation which meant that there was an increase of women who joined the workforce and for some this helped to bring about financial independence. Having a disposable income allowed some women to become influential in consumer markets. Such interests in retail did help to bring about a curiosity that extended beyond the department store, such as in Hollywood glamour and mass culture. Mass production did revolutionise the retail trade, transforming department stores in the products they could offer at a lower price than their nearest smaller competitors.
Department stores came to understand that women were vital if their businesses were going to be successful in the 1930s. Because more women were employed after World War I, it allowed a shift in the products marketed towards females. Marketing strategies were changed to accommodate the new working woman with the glamour that proved popular in Hollywood, and women wanting to replicate the looks of the actresses they came across at the cinema. Advertising and marketing increased significantly in the 1930s, and department stores became not only a place for consumerism but also a site for leisure and entertainment. Department stores used numerous ways of attracting new customers, such as the beautiful architecture of the buildings that housed their stores, the interior design, and excessive window displays to show what consumer items they could offer. Using department stores in this way allowed customers to socialise and entertain themselves; by inviting customers to fashion parades and promoting products. In Inviting film stars to stores, people could enter the retail sphere without spending money. The creative ways that store managers enticed customers helped to broaden consumer culture. With the increase in mass media, such as newspapers, radio, and women’s magazines, stores had the power to reach out to potential customers. The changes in consumerism in Liverpool during the interwar period showed that the rise of the working-class female shopper in Liverpool led to a culture of abundance.
Literature
Unemployment and Poverty Historiography
To understand the socio-economic activities in Liverpool during the interwar period, this thesis will include a chapter on the context that brought about a change in the Liverpool economy that turned the once thriving port city into a site of consumerism and culture. Joshua Civin, in the chapter, Slaves, Sati and Sugar: Constructing Imperial Identity through Liverpool Petition Struggles, concentrates his research on the transatlantic slave trade, but he does maintain that the construction of the Albert Dock, which occurred after the abolition of slavery, brought further wealth to the city. Helen B. McCartney offers a revisionist historiography in Citizen Soldiers: The Liverpool Territorials in the First World War, which discusses ideas of isolation and injury for those soldiers who returned to the city after World War I and how this impacted the employment levels within Liverpool. Ian Gazeley, in Poverty in Britain 1900-1965, dissects the poverty levels in Merseyside from 1929-1930. This analysis focuses on how many people lived in poverty and why it was so prevalent. However, there are gaps in Gazeley’s research when examining how available poor aid was to those who needed help. Peter Fearon’s inquiry in A Social Evil Liverpool Moneylenders 1920-1940 shows the importance of researching the Moneylenders Act 1927. The rising poverty and predatory money lending that was taking place has allowed Fearon to analyse how the Moneylenders Act failed to bring stability for those who were reliant on community lending. A study carried out by Caradog Jones in The Social Survey of Merseyside helps comprehend families’ struggles with rising debt. Jones’s research uses quantitative data to illustrate people experiencing poverty in Liverpool. Jones’s information contains charts and statistics, but it needs to include literature detailing any personal accounts of deprivation. As a result, while the research is centred on the whole city, gaps in the literature are evident because of the failure to interview people who had experienced such deprivation.
Rise of the Shopping Experience Historiography
This study also aims to show the variations in the rise of the shopping experience and how department stores capitalised on societal changes to entice shoppers into their stores. Assessing Jeffrey Richards’s revisionist history in The Age of the Dream Palace: Cinema and Society in Britain 1930-1939 offers an analytical examination of the social and historical contexts. However, Richards must address whether class structures were a factor in attending the cinema. In Transformations in a Culture of Consumption Women and Department Stores 1890-1925, William Leach argues that department stores offered women a change from the domestic sphere. Leach’s research is predominantly about the American market in the rise of the cinema and how that affected the female shopper, but the same issues were evident in Liverpool, too. Matt Houlbrook brings forth the argument in A Pin to See the Peepshow: Culture, Fiction and Selfhood in Edith Thompson’s Letters 1921-22 that the rise of culture brought about a change in selfhood, bringing new perspectives, desires and encounters after World War I. Jess Berry supports this argument in Fashion Capital: Style Economies, Sites of Cultures, stating that fashion links together culture and commerce and this was regardless of the class structures that were already in place. Mica Nova theorises in the book chapter Modernity’s Disavowal, Women the City and the Department Store that women were not entirely restricted by the domestic sphere with females creating space for themselves in department stores caused through store managers directing their advertising strategies at the working-class female shopper with schemes that would influence consumer markets.
Behind the Scenes of Retailing Historiography
While it is important to examine the transformations for customers in retailing, it is equally important to understand the shifts in mass marketing and production and how these changes impacted the department store. James B. Jeffreys, in Retail Trading in Britain 1850-1950, believes that the chain store’s introduction was more important than the department store in the interwar era. This theory supports the analysis by Victoria De Grazia in Irresistible Empire: America’s Advance through Twentieth Century Europe. De Grazia’s work focuses on American ideas on retailing. She does argue that British department stores struggled to adapt to the changes in consumerism. Both debates go against the discussion in this thesis that Liverpool’s department stores succeeded in the interwar period.
From High Culture to Mass Culture in Liverpool Historiography
This paper will also investigate the impacts of high culture in Liverpool and how it developed into mass culture through the interwar years. A. J. P. Taylor, in English History 1914-1945, observed the 1930s and saw that society was struggling with deep levels of deprivation, but he could also see the country’s wealth and believed that Britain had never been so affluent. In Love on the Dole, Walter Greenwood studies the notion that shoppers could participate in the fashion trends that were taking place because the manufacturing of products became less costly. These discussions help to support this thesis that the mass manufacturing of culture and products was feasible in Liverpool’s city centre because of the production developments that were created.
Methodology
In order to understand the effects of department stores on the economy in interwar Liverpool, this thesis will use a socio-economic method to examine the consumer changes that took place in Liverpool at the time. Using a socio-economic methodology for this study is limited in its approach owing to the research period. Problems that arose include data collection challenges when analysing statistics focused on unemployment and poverty ratios. There were also concerns about using data in the 1940s and 1950s because of reliability concerns, with statistics being based on averages.
Using a socio-economic method allows this thesis to examine the context of unemployment and poverty in Liverpool and how both issues were crucial in changing consumerism. From this perspective, this study will show how the rise of consumer culture helped accelerate the advances in mass production and how consumers adapted to such reforms. The socio-economic model also helps to explain the changes that were made in the welfare of the workforce and how this helped to run an effective business. The academic scholarship surrounding ideas around retail needs to be expanded significantly on the transformations that department stores were able to achieve, which brought about economic stability.
Charlotte Wildman, who concentrated on the shopping culture that increased in Liverpool during the interwar period despite the economic downturn in her book Urban Redevelopment and Modernity in Liverpool and Manchester 1918-1939, achieved a great amount of scholarship on this topic. Despite this, more analysis is needed on the changes that department stores carried out to achieve financial stability in the city. Such as how much money did department stores make per year, and this will help researchers unearth if department stores were successful in helping Liverpool’s recovery from the financial instability of the Great Depression. As this research concentrates on a timescale of a hundred years past, there are limitations due to the inability to interview those who experienced the rise of consumerism in the interwar period. However, by analysing newspaper articles of the time, this study can successfully investigate the unemployment levels and how deeply rooted poverty was in Liverpool. Articles detailing the casualisation of the workforce at Liverpool docks detail the despair of the unemployed and help us understand why there was a need for economic change in the city. With the fall of dressmakers and small independent retailers in urban areas, statistics effectively strengthen the debate that department stores became more popular in the city centre.
An essential primary source utilised in this study is the biography of Lewis’s chairman, Frederick Marquis. He articulates his plans to turn around Liverpool’s finances through consumerism and improve the welfare of workers at his store. The insight from Marquis is vital because it shows how department stores used the mass production of their goods to appeal to everyone regardless of class. Advertisements placed in newspapers are also scrutinised to show how department stores enticed the consumer to their stores through mass media. Analysing articles published in magazines such as Lucille of Liverpool shows how the media’s attitudes changed towards female shoppers. With the exhibition of Mrs Tinne’s Wardrobe at Liverpool’s Walker Art Gallery, we can understand that some women From the upper classes used shopping as a hobby, which led to feelings of empowerment through fashion and consumerism.
Chapter One
Unemployment and Poverty in Liverpool 1920 – 1934
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to provide context for the reasons why the economy of Liverpool changed during the interwar period. Decline within Liverpool docks brought about mass unemployment in Liverpool. This thesis will explain the decline and how people struggled to cope in the interwar period to support themselves and their families. There is a need to understand what happened to bring about these changes so the city could become financially viable. The outcome of this thesis will help scholars better understand the reasons why Liverpool had to change from a place of maritime that focused on the docks to an area of commercialisation, which brought about the rise in consumerism. Although there is scholarship on the independent points raised in this chapter, there needs to be more academic literature on the broader topic of Liverpool switching from maritime to consumer culture for financial gain. The scholarship discussed by McCartney analyses the impact of World War I on the residents of Liverpool such as the shortage of workers available because men were being conscripted for war.
Using statistics published in the Liverpool Echo the thesis analyses the unemployment rates during the interwar period and how some people in authority played down this increase. Gazeley has analysed the Pilgrim Trust’s visit to Liverpool and discovered that this led to a significant increase in impoverishment in the city due to rising unemployment levels. These high rates of poverty allow this thesis to explore the response from many women who handled domestic expenditure and, when struggling with debt, resorted to community lending. O’Connell and Fearon have researched how moneylending impacted communities and families in Liverpool during the 1930s, and to support their investigation, The Moneylending Act 1927 is explored in this study to explain the ways moneylending was seen as a predatory act that caused further financial hardships to many families in the city. The discussions put forward in this chapter examine the financial problems that some families in Liverpool faced when it came to the high poverty rates, and this helps to reinforce why Liverpool had to transform its finances to stabilise the city’s economy.
Decline of the Docks 1922-1932
The imported trade that sailed into Liverpool’s Docks shows how the city’s economy had changed since the nineteenth century. Along with the developments of steam power and transportation links, it helped Liverpool’s docklands to become bustling with warehouses and shipyards.[1] According to Civin, The construction of the Albert Dock in 1846 helped to solidify Liverpool’s dominance as a port city after the abolition of slavery in 1807 caused the port’s economy to decrease.[2] Because of Liverpool’s position within the slave trade the abolition of slavery impacted on Liverpool’s economy. There was now a need for change and diversification. To bring an end to the economic decline and divert attention away from the ending of the slave trade, the construction of the Albert Dock took place. It was a ground-breaking project for its time and served to accommodate heavier ships and generate an efficient way to import freight.
Hydraulic cranes and warehouses directly on Liverpool’s waterfront brought about an increase in improved machinery. The primary purpose was to create a new wave of trade and show that Liverpool could be an economical port city without having to rely on the slave trade to enhance its economy.[3] Although the construction of the Albert Dock was impressive, it cannot be said to have independently solidified Liverpool’s dominance as a port city. The end of the slave trade and the structural changes in the global economy were the primary reasons for the decrease in the port’s economy. Additionally, the construction of the Albert Dock did not address the significant concern that affected the economy of Liverpool’s Docks. Competition from other seaports was high, with cities such as London, Bristol and Glasgow also adjusting to the changes in the economic landscape. Liverpool’s port was losing trade to other cities and towns at a rate of 0.2 per cent yearly.[4] The 0.2 per cent annual decrease in trade indicates that the port of Liverpool was affected by changes in shipping routes and the slowing down of the economy.
The interwar years were turbulent for the dockyards. By 1924 Liverpool’s port imported ninety-five per cent of raw cotton. By 1931, this had fallen to sixty-seven per cent. According to research by Allen and Hyde et al., the imports of cotton never rose above seventy per cent after 1931.[5] One reason for the port’s failure to thrive was because of the downturn in trade. Hence, unemployment began to rise within the port, with those who were employed as carters and storekeepers struggling to maintain their roles at the docks. Port exports declined, too. Research by Smith and Monkhouse et al., states that at its peak, exports stood at £480 million in 1920 but fell to £234 million in 1922. By 1932, this had reduced further to £103 million.[6] Because of the decline in shipping exports, the demand for raw materials fell and this negatively affected the shipping manufacturing industry which decreased across the city.
Hatton and Thomas, in their research, explain that the high levels of unemployment were brought about because of the decline in dockyard activity. To both, the problems that arose in cities and towns were regional. In areas such as cotton, coal, and shipbuilding, for instance it became evident because the production of such trades belonged to specific areas in the United Kingdom that the issues were contained to certain parts of the country.[7] In 1931, Keynes argued that the world was ‘in the middle of the greatest economic catastrophe…of the modern world…there is a possibility that when the crisis is looked back upon by the economic historians of the future it will be seen to mark one of the major turning points.[8] Writing in 1960 H. R. Poole who worked for Liverpool Council of Social Service argued that any ambitions that Liverpool had after World War I of rebuilding the city were hindered by the economic downturn of the 1930s. Because Liverpool was so reliant on its docks, many industries were affected by the high unemployment rates.[9] Such a decline in dockyard labour saw demand for imports and exports shrink, leading to mass unemployment and economic decline and with the onset of the Great Depression the people of Liverpool fell further into debt. Because of Liverpool’s dependence on industries that suffered during the financial recession, Liverpool’s economic suffering was felt twofold.
The Impact of World War I on Liverpool’s Docks 1914-1918
Liverpool docks were fundamental to the World War I war effort, strategically and economically, and assisted in communications and freight. The port was also utilised by serving soldiers and nurses as a transportation point, with people from commonwealth nations using the docks as a route to the WWI battlefields.[10] The placement of Liverpool as a significant port allowed many naval vessels to reside in the docks during their defence of the maritime trade routes against the threat of the German U-boats. Liverpool Maritime Museum reports that the number of ships on the Mersey increased to keep Britain supplied with food and other essential goods for the war effort.[11] However, work at the Docks during World War I did not always run smoothly with the port suffering with a shortage of workers. According to the Liverpool Echo, large food consignments lay untouched because of the need for dock labourers. The Dock Labour Joint Committee removed restrictions on any man who could effectively do the work, such was the desperation of the committee for an effective workforce.[12] Although, McCarney critically evaluates how Liverpool’s port contributed to the war effort and how the conflict impacted on the city in the long term. During the interwar period, Liverpool faced significant hardships caused by the economic difficulties and the rebuilding process of the social upheaval of soldiers returning from the war who were often wounded and required support once back home.[13] The challenges that occurred here shaped the transformations that the city undertook during the interwar period and helped to bring about the rise in consumerism that occurred away from the dockyards.
Unemployment rates in Liverpool 1922-1934
At the end of 1924, 26,861 men were unemployed in the city of Liverpool. Mr William B Potts, manager of the Liverpool Administrative Exchange, in an article with the Liverpool Echo, stated that the ‘figures were certainly depressing but one must take into account the population of the city’.[14]
Potts’ point was that 818,435 people were living in Liverpool at the time.[15] Hence an unemployment rate of almost 27,000 was not a big problem. Potts also believed that such a downward turn usually happened after Christmas.[16] However, by 1934, this figure had reached 58,000 people who were unemployed and in receipt of benefits. According to an article in the Liverpool Echo from 1934, 84,301 people were receiving aid from the Liverpool Public Assistance Committee.[17]
Using dockworkers as an example, research by Bean states that from 1861 to 1889, the number of dockworkers was 24,000.[18] Yet the Labour Gazette published in 1922, states that the number of employees that worked on the docks had fallen to 14,578.[19] According to the Liverpool Daily Post, poor relief statistics showed that 50,210 people in the area were receiving domiciliary relief with 23,735 of those people in receipt of the benefit being classed as unemployed. People receiving relief under the poor law was 667 per 10,000 compared with 286 per 10,000 for England and Wales for 1931-2.[20]
Caradog Jones’s research states that by 1932, unemployment in Liverpool was 108,000 – twenty-eight per cent for the whole city with nearly one in three of the working population in Liverpool being unemployed.[21] Few men were able to find a whole week’s work with those who did find employment usually working for three days. Those who could not find employment usually arrived at the docks, hoping they would be chosen for work that day.
Those registered as unemployed dock workers would have to attend the docks every day to receive benefits. Searching for employment without success made these men feel like a failure.[22] From 1921, dockers who were registered were able to claim statutory unemployment benefit if they did not work for more than three days per week. Some did exploit this system by ensuring that they only worked for half of the working week, knowing that they could then claim unemployment benefits. In 1929, three-quarters of registered dockers received government help.[23] Men who could work were trapped within a cycle of unemployment, casualisation and low wages, which brought uncertainty to their lives – the connection between the financial systems and social settings emphasised the circumstances in Liverpool at the time. Not only did working-class men struggle with the unpredictability of the unemployment rates and low wages, but this also profoundly affected their families and communities.
The situation was no better for women who struggled with gender discrimination and low levels of pay. Roles in nursing, domestic service and household duties saw women carrying out menial jobs that were undervalued within society. There was not much opportunity for women to progress in paid employment with statistics showing that by 1931 only thirty-six per cent of women aged fourteen plus were in employment. However, in some employment sectors women flourished. Areas such as retail and clerical roles saw women entering the workplace and earning a weekly wage. Although wages were low for those women who were living with their families it offered a level of economic independence.[24] Poverty levels were high and many families struggled with unemployment with people taking causal work to at least have some money to stop themselves from slipping further into deprivation.
Poverty and the effects of casualisation 1929-1932
The lack of employment meant that workers were forced to apply for any lowly paid work that became available to them. An article in The Daily Herald in April 1929 described a ‘disturbance’ at Wapping Dock. The owners of the S.S., Scottish Prince, were looking for casual labourers to work on their fruit steamer, resulting in five hundred men applying for the two hundred available jobs. After selecting a workforce, fighting broke out, such was the desperation of the men applying for work to provide for their families. The article states that the crowd shouted, ‘We want work’ and ‘Remember our families’. The employers of S.S, Scottish Prince prioritised their workforce by offering employment to those men who had a sustained amount of unemployment and those who had to provide for their families.[25]
Men who managed to gain employment were classed as casual workers with contracts that would only last a month. The effects of a casualisation workforce meant that by 1932, families were living with extreme poverty levels, a conclusion that the Pilgrim trust drew on their visit to the city in the 1930s. What the trust discovered was that there was a connection between slum living in the inner-city areas of Liverpool and high poverty rates.[26] According to data discovered by Gazeley, the population rate in Liverpool in 1931 was 846,1010 but with many living in slum housing there were concerns over occupants being unwell and thus being unable to look for work through illness.[27] It was a cycle of desperation that those living in appalling housing conditions could not free themselves from. There were high unemployment rates for men aged eighteen to thirty-five who had to support their large families with dependent children. With three hundred and twenty-four children for every one hundred men in the city. The Pilgrim Trust were damning in their report on Liverpool and stated that it was rooted in high levels of deprivation, with many families not being able to run their homes effectively.[28] Slum housing was characterised by the lack of basic facilities such as overcrowding, lack of sanitation and inadequate housing and with the lack of employment and the links to slum living this meant that the needs of families could not be successfully met which then brought about a never-ending cycle of poverty that was difficult to escape from. The desperation of those living in such abject poverty made it extremely difficult to find employment because of the conditions they were living in.
The role of Women in managing their household expenditure
Families dealing with high poverty levels looked at other ways of supplementing their income. Usually, household expenditure management fell to married women who had to stretch their incomes for items such as clothing, groceries, and rental payments. When times were difficult for families, community support became invaluable to those in need. To navigate these difficult times, women relied on support from their neighbours, friends and family to ensure their families were cared for. There was a sense of community spirit amongst neighbourhoods, with women providing meals for their needy neighbours, watching their budget, and stretching their income as far as possible. Women, too, had to be imaginative when it came to supplementing their household income, with many resorting to working from home in trades such as sewing or taking in laundry for a small income. Such jobs allowed women to remain in the family home while obtaining an income. Women were also able to grow their own food and breed poultry to cut down on the amount of food they bought from independent shops.[29] Although the role of women within the domestic sphere is often overlooked in the debates surrounding unemployment, they did experience multiple hardships as they struggled to support their families. Recognising their resilience as they navigated through such challenging times is essential.
The Cycle of Debt through Moneylending
For those who were living below the poverty line and were facing unemployment there was no choice but to pawn what small amounts they owned or borrow money from family and friends. For certain people who did have money set aside they began moneylending businesses to assist those who were in need. Most of the time, the people who ran these organisations were women who had set up their financial businesses from their homes.[30] Using a moneylender helped pay household expenditures. It was primarily women who found themselves slipping further into debt to cover these costs, usually without the knowledge of their families because of the shame that financial hardship would bring.[31] Although this type of credit helped those families who were in financial need it did bring about a cycle of debt because many people struggled to pay back what was borrowed with interest. One example of how difficult it was for families to avoid the poverty trap can be seen in Jones’ research. For men who had left the family home and were working at sea, their employers made a weekly contribution to their wives. In 1931, such payments were one pound and five shillings, not enough money to support a family. In this respect running up debts and seeking support from a moneylender was the only option for some women who felt like they had no choice.[32] In order to run a successful moneylending business it was vital to know who lived in the local area and who exactly was lending money. One way to achieve this was through networking within the local community. This could be achieved through local shopping trips or visits to places such as launderettes. Such visits allowed women to exchange information on who could offer credit and also for moneylenders to whom not to lend money.[33] For those women who did want to borrow, there was a need for confidentiality, and seeking out information at sites that women mostly occupied allowed women to obtain information from others who had experiences with moneylending.
Because of the trust concerns moneylenders mostly lent money to those they knew or had a family connection to. This was because most of those who borrowed from someone they were familiar with had a minimal risk of defaulting on a loan. Another way a moneylender would loan money would be because the borrower was of the same religious faith. However, ultimately, what allowed a moneylender to decide to loan money came down to how creditworthy the borrower was and if they had any income that would allow them to repay their debt, including any benefits received from the national government. Moneylending practices were inconsistent and predatory. For those people who did not know the moneylender personally proof of a rent book or employment would be enough to allow borrowing to take place.[34] According to O’Connell allowing borrowing to take place within the community boosted social cohesion and brought about a support network for those who were struggling financially.[35] However, privacy for those wanting to borrow could not be guaranteed because communities knew were moneylenders lived. There was shame associated with this kind of borrowing. Lending in this way was usually carried out by those with low socioeconomic status and accepting support from a moneylender was seen as a last resort because it also came with high-interest rates.
The exceptional unemployment rates for those people who faced financial hardships meant they were less likely to want to resort to borrowing money. Intervention from the government using policies that would help those struggling with poverty offered support without relying on exploitative moneylending practices.[36] The need for benefits or emergency credit reveals the economic problems that working-class families had to deal with during the interwar period. However, because of the high unemployment rates, receiving benefits was essential for survival for some families.
The Money Lending Act of 1927
In order to protect people who were vulnerable to predatory moneylending within communities, the government introduced the Money Lenders Act of 1927. The act ensured lenders were licenced and attempted to stop the extreme interest rates.[37] The act was criticised for not protecting people enough against excessive moneylending. Vulnerable borrowers still had to contend with extreme debt because the act did not stop the high-interest rates or limit how much people could borrow. The governing body responsible for the act’s administration did not successfully assess the predatory lending practices that were still taking place. This meant that moneylenders remained unregulated and faced no consequences of forcing borrowers to pay high-interest rates. The act was a failure because it did not protect the borrower as it offered no consumer education, which may have given people the opportunity to make educated decisions on the lending practices.[38] Because potential borrowers were not informed about such practices, there were concerns that people would continue to struggle with their economic difficulties.
Conclusion
The downturn in employment and Liverpool’s dock during the interwar period damaged the local economy because the decrease in imports and exports created mass unemployment and economic decline. The financial downturn and the unreliability of the available jobs created a constant state of uncertainty for many dock workers. The cycle of debt that people found themselves in increased the poverty rates and impacted people’s mental well-being. Research into the effects of economic uncertainty emphasises the need to discuss the systematic concerns that people were facing at the time, such as employment unpredictability and concerns about low-paid incomes. Changes to the overall economy, such as the Great Depression of the 1930s, poor government assistance and the individual poverty that followed all brought a rise in the hopelessness people felt when dealing with such deprivation. However, despite the difficulties that families encountered, the resilience of women was evident as they supported their families through turbulent times.
Furthermore, women challenged social norms and established their autonomy by borrowing money, which became crucial to networking in working-class areas. While this unauthorised method brought women a support network when dealing with financial problems, it also brought limitations. Without education to make informed economic decisions, people experienced a cycle of borrowing, which led to further economic decline. Addressing these concerns through education and placing restrictions on community lending was a way to stop vulnerable people from slipping further into deprivation.
Because of the unemployment levels and extreme poverty that some people experienced, Liverpool had to reinvent itself as a city to become a place of consumerism during the interwar period. The city’s capability to adapt to the demands of the consumer helped to bring about economic growth and, with that, brought employment prospects. Nevertheless, it is essential to investigate the disparities from placing so much prominence on consumerism and the consequences of an economy so reliant on consumer spending.
[1] J. E. Allison, ‘The Development of Merseyside and the Port of Liverpool’, The Town Planning Review, 24, no. 1 (1953): pp. 60–72.
[2] Joshua Civin, ‘Slaves, sati and sugar: constructing imperial identity through Liverpool petition struggles’ in Parliament, Nations and Identities in Britain and Ireland 1660-1850, eds. Julian Hoppit, (Manchester, 2003), p. 191.
[3] Paul Ingram, and Brian S. Silverman, ‘The Cultural Contingency of Structure: Evidence from Entry to the Slave Trade In and Around the Abolition Movement’, American Journal of Sociology 3, no. 3 (2016), pp. 755-797.
[4] Members of Merseyside Socialist Research Group, Genuinely Seeking Work, (Liverpool, 1992), p. 13-4.
[5] G.C. Allen, F. E. Hyde, et al., The Import Trade of the Port of Liverpool, (Liverpool, 1946), pp. 20-1.
[6] Winfred Smith, F. J. Monkhouse, et al, Merseyside A Scientific Survey British Association for the Advancement of Science, (Liverpool, 1953), p. 162.
[7] Nicholas Crafts and Peter Fearon, ‘Lessons from the 1930s Great Depression’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 26, no. 2 (2010), p. 287.
[8] Ibid., p. 298.
[9] Samantha Caslin, Save the Womanhood, (Liverpool, 2018), pp. 88-89.
[10] Nora Elizabeth Daly, Memoirs of a Word War I Nurse, (Bloomington, 2011), p. 67-68.
[11] The Port of Liverpool at War, Archive sheet 30 – The port of Liverpool at war | National Museums Liverpool (liverpoolmuseums.org.uk) (accessed on 27 November 2023).
[12] Liverpool Echo, Dock Labour, Nov 18, 1914, Dock Labour. | Liverpool Echo | Wednesday 18 November 1914 | British Newspaper Archive (accessed on 27 November 2023).
[13] Helen B. McCartney, Citizen Soldiers The Liverpool Territorials in the First World War (Cambridge, 2005), p. 116.
[14] Liverpool Echo, Merseyside Unemployment, Nov 12, 1934, https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0000271/19251231/102/0007 (accessed on 11 July, 2023).
[15] Population Data, Liverpool Population Data’, https://populationdata.org.uk/liverpool-population/ (accessed on 11 July, 2023).
[16] Liverpool Echo, Poverty, Nov 12, 1934, https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0000271/19251231/102/0007 (accessed on 11 July, 2023).
[17] Liverpool Echo, The Talk of the Town, https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/BL/0000271/19341112/291/0010 (accessed on 11 July, 2023).
[18] R Bean, ‘The Liverpool Dock Strike of 1890’, International Review of Social History 18, no. 4 (1973), p. 54.
[19] Labour Gazette, Dock, and Riverside Labour, April 1922, https://lse-atom.arkivum.net/uploads/r/lse-digital-library/9/d/f/9df717e519974ec5bedd292a95a122e98b621d8c3c7eda7f1607efce032c9364/6e07aeb9-dd64-45e3-8d9c-951762e9273e-UKLSE_DL1_EH01_001_029_0005_0001.pdf (accessed on 12 July, 2023).
[20] Liverpool Daily Post, How Unemployment Adds to Liverpool’s Burden, 22 July 1932, https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0000649/19320722/007/0007 (accessed on 13 July, 2023).
[21] D. Caradog Jones, Social Survey of Merseyside Vol. II, (Liverpool, 1934), p. 366.
[22] Members of Merseyside Socialist Research Group, Genuinely Seeking Work, p. 19.
[23] G. Phillips and N. Whiteside, Casual Labour The Unemployment Question in the Port Transport Industry 1880-1970, (Oxford, 1985), pp. 184-7.
[24] Sheila Rowbotham, Hidden from History, (London, 1985), pp. 192-3.
[25] Daily Herald, Men Fight for Work, 6 April, 1929, https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0000681/19290406/032/0002 (accessed on 17 July, 2023).
[26] Jones, Social Survey of Merseyside, p. 109-120.
[27] I Gazeley, Poverty in Britain 1900-1965, (Basingstoke, 2003), pp. 111.
[28] Ibid., p. 128.
[29] E. Roberts, Women’s Work 1840-1940, (London, 1980), 49-53.
[30] Peter Fearon, ‘A Social Evil Liverpool Moneylenders 1920s-1940s’, Urban History 42, no. 3 (2015): 440-41.
[31] Ibid., pp. 445-6.
[32] Caradog Jones, The Social Survey of Merseyside, p. 85.
[33] Fearon, ‘A Social Evil Liverpool Moneylenders 1920s-1940s’, p. 441-2.
[34] Fearon, A Social Evil: Liverpool Moneylenders 1920-1940, pp. 440-455.
[35] Sean O’Connell, Credit and Community Working Class Debt in the UK since 1880, (New York, 2009), pp. 162-5.
[36] P Thane, ‘The Welfare State and the Labour Market’, in Work and Pay in Twentieth Century Britain, ed. N. Crafts, I Gazeley and A Newell(Oxford, 2007), pp.186-8.
[37] H. Hone, Ralph, N. Paschalis, and C. J. Colombos. ‘Mediterranean’, Journal of Comparative Legislation and International Law 16, no. 3 (1934), p.176.
[38] Fearon, A Social Evil: Liverpool Moneylenders 1920-1940, pp. 449-461.
louisealacy.wordpress.com 