¹ America's share, estimated by J. H. Dunning, was 10.3 percent. Explaining International Production (London, 1988), 15Google Scholar. See also Wilkins, M., “Comparative Hosts,” Business History 36:1 (1994): 20CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jones, G., The Evolution of International Business: An Introduction (London, 1996), 31Google Scholar. 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. Wilkins, M., The History of Foreign Investment in the United States to 1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1989), 145Google Scholar.

² According to C. Lewis, Britain's share was 46.4 percent. America's Stake in International Investments (Washington, D.C., 1938), 546Google Scholar. See also Buckley, P. J. and Roberts, B. R., European Direct Investment in the USA Before World War I (London, 1982), 14CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Similarly, Britain accounted for 59.9 percent of long-term foreign investments in the United States in 1914. Wilkins, The History, 159.

³ Wilkins, The History, 361. For individual industries invested in by British multinationals, see Wilkins, The History, 155-67, 350-82; Wilkins, M., “European Multinationals in the United States: 1815-1914” in Multinational Enterprise in Historical Perspective, eds Teichova, A. et al. (Cambridge, U.K., 1986), 55–64Google Scholar; Lewis, America's Stake, 78-113, 562-7; Buckley and Roberts, European, 15, 43-84.

⁴ Kim, Dong-Woon, “J. & P. Coats as a Multinational before 1914,” Business and Economic History 26:2 (1997), 527Google Scholar. See also Corley, T. A. B., “Britain's Overseas Investments in 1914 Revisited,” Business History 36:1 (1994), 73CrossRefGoogle Scholar. 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”; Kim, Dong-Woon, “J. & P. Coats in Tsarist Russia, 1889-1917,” Business History Review 69 (Winter 1995CrossRefGoogle Scholar); Harris, E., “J. & P. Coats in Poland” in Historical Studies in International Corporate Business, eds. Teichova, A. et al. (Cambridge, U.K., 1989Google Scholar). See also Kim, Dong-Woon, “From a Family Partnership to a Corporate Company: J. & P. Coats, Thread Manufacturers,” Textile History 25:2 (1994CrossRefGoogle Scholar).

⁵ 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, 27Google Scholar. For information on the net national product, see Davis, L. E. et al. , American Economic Growth—An Economist's History of the United States (New York, 1972), 34Google Scholar.

⁶ On spindles and raw cotton consumption, see Mitchell, B. R., International Historical Statistics—The Americas and Australasia (London, 1983), 472, 475CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mitchell, B. R., European Historical Statistics, 1750-1970 (London, abridged ed, 1978), 252-3, 255, 258Google Scholar; Mitchell, B. R. and Deane, P., Abstract of British Historical Statistics (Cambridge, U.K., 1971), 179, 185Google Scholar; and North, D., “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. Habakkuk, H. J. and Poston, M. (Cambridge, U.K., 1965), 684Google Scholar. On cotton weaving and clothing industries, see North, “Industrialization in the United States,” 682. On consumption of cotton goods, see Martin, E. W., The Standard of Living in 1860—American Consumption Levels on the Eve of the Civil War (Chicago, 1942), 186Google Scholar.

⁷ “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. Dorman, “A History of the Singer Company (U.K.) Ltd. (Clydebank Factory),” typescript (c. 1972), Glasgow University Archives, UGD 121/5/2, 8.

⁸ Head, C., Old Sewing Machines (Aylesbury, U.K., 1982), 6-15, 26Google Scholar; Wilkins, M., The Emergence of Multinational Enterprise: American Business Abroad from the Colonial Era to 1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1976), 37-8, 43Google Scholar; Davies, R. B., “‘Peacefully Working to Conquer the World’: The Singer Manufacturing Company in Foreign Markets, 1854-1889,” Business History Review 43:3 (1969), 300–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Blair, M., The Paisley Thread Industry (Paisley, U.K., 1907), 29–32Google Scholar.

⁹ Walsh, M., “The Democratization of Fashion: The Emergence of the Women's Dress Pattern Industry,” Journal of American History 66:2 (1979), 300-4, 307-8, 311CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁰ Nicholas, S., “Agency Contracts, Institutional Modes, and the Transition to Foreign Direct Investment by British Manufacturing Multinationals before 1939,” Journal of Economic History 43:3 (1983), 677CrossRefGoogle Scholar; 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 intenalization 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 (1982Google Scholar); “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. Hertner, P. and Jones, G. (Aldershot, U.K., 1986Google Scholar); and “Locational Choice, Performance and The Growth of British Multinational Firms,” Business History 31:3 (1989Google Scholar).

¹¹ Kim, “From a Family Partnership,” 216 n. 5.

¹² 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.

¹³ Kim, “From a Family Partnership,” 189.

¹⁴ Wilkins, The History, 166, 361. See also Jones, The Evolution, 146.

¹⁵ Coats, “From the Cottage,” 32.

¹⁶ Cairncross, A. K. and Hunter, J. B. K., “The Early Growth of J. & P. Coats, 1830-83,” Business History 29:2 (1987): 158CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hunter, “Thomas Coats,” 332; Hunter, “Archibald Coats,” 329; Coats, “From the Cottage,” 30-1.

¹⁷ Payne, P. L., “The Emergence of the Large-Scale Company in Great Britain, 1870-1914,” Economic History Review 20:3 (1967), 529–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Macrosty, H. W., The Trust Movement in British Industry—A Study of Business Organisation (London, 1907), 126–47Google Scholar; Clapham, J. H., An Economic History of Modern Europe III (Cambridge, U.K., 1951), 224–6Google Scholar; Kim, “From a Family Partnership,” 195-204.

¹⁸ Schmitz, C. J., The Growth of Big Business in the United States and Western Europe, 1850-1939 (London, 1993), 39–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wilson, J. F., British Business History, 1720-1994 (Manchester, 1995), 14Google Scholar.

¹⁹ Kim, “From a Family Partnership,” 186.

²⁰ Ibid., 187.

²¹ Ibid., 186; Blair, The Paisley, 34-43, 54-61.

²² Blair, The Paisley, 49.

²³ According to Cairncross and Hunter, “By 1831 [J. & P. Coats was] already selling sixcord 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.

²⁴ Coats, “From the Cottage,” 17-8.

²⁵ Ibid., 18, 22.

²⁶ Chapman, S. D., Merchant Enterprise in Britain (Cambridge, U.K., 1992), 69CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²⁷ Ibid., 17-8.

²⁸ Coats, “From the Cottage,” 18-9, 25.

²⁹ Ibid., 22-3.

³⁰ Ibid., 20-1.

³¹ Ibid., 18, 21-2.

³² Ibid., 25. It is rather strange that the Philadelphia agency was named as Bates & ‘Coates’ rather than Bates & ‘Coats’. The former is used in some other sources as well (those in Table 2), while the latter appears once in a source (John Bell, “Our Historical Heritage,” typescript prepared for the first national sales conference of household trade field staff [c. 1955], Coats Viyella plc Archives, HH/5/2, 2).

³³ Ibid., 25-7; Table 2.

³⁴ Coats, “From the Cottage,” 27; directors' meeting, J. & P. Coats (hereafter, meeting(s)), 7 Dec. 1885, Minute Book 1884-1890, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/1/1 (hereafter, Book 1); Table 2. According to Cairncross and Hunter, the Auchinclosses began to borrow money from J. & P. Coats from 1870; the total loans and advances stood at £124,000 in 1883. “The Early Growth,” 167.

³⁵ Coats, “From the Cottage,” 24; Table 2.

³⁶ Coats, “From the Cottage,” 24-5, 27; meetings, 10 Dec. 1885, 3 May, 18 May, 2 July 1886, Book 1.

³⁷ Coats, “From the Cottage,” 19-20, 22, 24-5.

³⁸ Ibid., 28-31. Between 1854 and 1860, some members of the Coats family produced the Coats thread under the name of J. & T. Coats. Bell, “Our Historical Heritage,” 1. Counterfeiters might have been aware of this name. “Coates” was presumably borrowed from Bates & Coates. In the early 1860s, a J. & P. Coats in the United States had imitated the wrappers of the Coats thread. Wilkins, The History, 690 n. 266.

³⁹ Coats, “From the Cottage,” 32. “I received my mandate from J. & P. Coats to make a trade for them in the United States [before appointing Hugh Auchincloss & Sons around 1841]” (20). Bell explains the origin of practice in a rather different way: “The … twenty-one years [after 1839] were spent in the United States, during which time [Andrew Coats] took such an active part in extending the business in J. & P. Coats Spool Cotton that he was named General Agent. On the bottom ticket of each spool was imprinted the statement ‘Andrew Coats, General Agent for the United States’.” “Our Historical Heritage,” 2.

⁴⁰ Coats, “From the Cottage,” 33. Hunter confirms, “… over 80% of [the sales in 1860] were exports to the US … Coats probably accounted for over 60% of British exports of cotton thread to the US, and over 20% of total British exports of sewing cotton.” “Thomas Coats,” 332.

⁴¹ By comparison, Cairncross and Hunter write, “Coats's exports to the United States had grown by the mid-1850s to over 80 percent of their… sales and accounted for about 90 percent of their profits” “The Early Growth,” 158-9.

⁴² Kim, “From a Family Partnership,” 189.

⁴³ Coats, “From the Cottage,” 33; Saint Andrew's Society, Biographical Register (place and date of publication unknown), 214; Paisley Central Library, “J. & P. Coats Ltd.—miscellaneous items, mainly historical,” typescript, O/S P7778, 42-4.

⁴⁴ Wilkins, The History, 129-30.

⁴⁵ Coats, “From the Cottage,” 32-3.

⁴⁶ Bell, “Our Historical Heritage,” 1-6. For a brief history of the Clarks' businesses in Paisley, see Hunter, “John Clark,” 326-7. According to Wilkins, George A. Clark began spooling imported hank thread on behalf of J. & J. Clark in 1860. Five years later, he founded the Passaic Thread Co., renamed the Clark Thread Company that year, with a mill in Newark for spinning and spooling; George A. Clark & Brothers remained as the sales company. The History, 129-30. Hunter writes: “George … had [before 1865] acted in America as an agent for J. & J. Clark and Kerr & Clark [where he was a partner and which joined the former company to form Clark & Co. in 1865]…. In 1860, [he] opened a small finishing and spooling mill in Newark … and four years later built a larger works to manufacture and finish thread…. His American interests were operated under the name of the Clark Thread Co.” “John Clark,” 326.

⁴⁷ Bell, “Our Historical Heritage,” 6; “Death of Sir James Coats,” Paisley and Renfrewshire Gazette, 20 Jan. 1913; “Sir James Coats—Death of a Paisley Benefactor,” Glasgow Herald, 21 Jan. 1913. See also Kim, “From a Family Partnership,” 191-2, 206. Hunter (“Thomas Coats,” 333) and Wilkins (The History, 130) indicate that James became a resident partner in 1860 and continued to reside in the United States until 1869. In addition, according to Wilkins, James had been staying in the country from 1856.

⁴⁸ “Historical Sketch” in Illustrated Souvenir—The Conant Thread Company (Boston, 1878Google Scholar); Wilkins, The History, 130. According to Wilkins, Conant had visited J. & P. Coats in Paisley in 1864. In relation to the take-over, her description may be misleading: “From [J. & P. Coats, Conant] obtained large amount of capital and proceeded to expand his … factory.” The History, 130. Between 1857 and 1868, Conant worked for the Willimantic Linen Company, a member company of the American Thread Company to be formed in 1898. The History, 813 n. 94.

⁴⁹ Kim, “From a Family Partnership,” 187, 191-2; Hunter, “Thomas Coats,” 332-3.

⁵⁰ “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.

⁵¹ 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.

⁵² “Historical 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.

⁵³ 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, £3.75 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,” 333-4; compare to “John Clark,” 326.

⁵⁴ In 1873, George Clark died and his brother William took charge of the Clark Thread Company and George A. Clark & Brothers. By the late 1870s, Clark & Co. had gained majority ownership of the Clark Thread Company and full ownership of the Clark Mile-End Spool Cotton Company. In 1884, it acquired [its] mother company, John Clark Jr. & Co.. See Wilkins, The History, 130, 362-3. By comparison, Hunter writes, “In 1877, following the death of Alexander Clark, who had succeeded George A. Clark to the control of the Clark Thread Company … William took over the management of the American business …” “John Clark,” 327. However, according to our source, J. & P. Coats and Clark & Co. were jointly dealing with competition from John Clark Jr. & Co. in 1893. Meetings, 11 July, 1 Aug. 1893, Minute Book 1890-1902, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/1/2 (hereafter, Book 2).

⁵⁵ Bell, “Our Historical Heritage,” 4. J. & P. Coats in Paisley also concentrated on a limited range of products including the sixcord thread. Hunter, “Archibald Coats,” 329. Nominal capital of J. & P. Coats was £2 million in 1884 and increased to £3.75 million in 1890. By comparison, that of Clark & Co. was £0.75 million in 1880 when the company changed from a partnership to an unlimited company; five years later, it rose to £0.8 million, which remained unchanged until 1895. J. & P. Coats, annual reports, 1884-1890, Scottish Record Office, BT 2/1414; Clark & Co., annual reports, 1880-1895, BT 2/958.

⁵⁶ Bell, “Our Historical Heritage,” 3-4. Wilkins also refers to aspects of “the advertising war.” The History, 362.

⁵⁷ Meetings, 5 Dec. 1887, 1 Mar., 28 May, 30 Oct., 1 Nov. 1889, Book 1; Kim, “J. & P. Coats in Tsarist Russia,” 489.

⁵⁸ Meetings, 6 Aug., 3 Sept. 1889, 30 Apr. 1890, 23 Feb., 16 Mar. 1891, Book 1; Finance Committee meetings, 25 Feb., 16 Mar. 1891, J. & P. Coats, Finance Committee Minute Book 1, 1890-1904, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/1/21.

⁵⁹ Kim, “From a Family Partnership,” 194.

⁶⁰ Meetings, 23 Feb., 24 Apr. 1891, Book 2; Kim, “From a Family Partnership,” 194.

⁶¹ Meetings, 17 Apr., 26 Apr., 22 June 1891, Book 2.

⁶² Meetings, 29 Sept., 10 Dec. 1891, Book 2.

⁶³ Meetings, 1 Sept. 1891, 30 Aug., 12 Dec. 1892, Book 2.

⁶⁴ Meeting, 10 Dec. 1891, Book 2.

⁶⁵ Meeting, 18 Dec. 1894, Book 2. Compare with Wilkins, The History, 362: “After 1893 … the production activities were conducted as one of the branches of J. & P. Coats (Limited) … the Conant Thread Company remained in existence, leasing its mills to J. & P. Coats, Ltd., Pawtucket Branch.” In 1895, the capital of the Conant Thread Company was $3 million; nearly all of it ($2,980,300) was owned by J. & P. Coats, while the remaining by six persons including H. Conant ($11,000) and James Coats ($4,000). Meeting, 29 Jan. 1895, Book 2; “The Conant Thread Co.” in Investments 1. For the free-standing company, see Wilkins, “The Free-Standing Company.” Along with the restructuring of the existing manufacturing facilities, J. & P. Coats was always ready to expand. There were two opportunities. The Paisley company had considered amalgamating several leading thread makers in early 1891, several months after a similar scheme to buy the Conant Thread Company. Five years later, it could have acquired two businesses recommended by George Draper & Son of Hopedale, Mass.—the Glasgo Yarn Mill Company of Glasgo, Conn., and the Glasgo Thread Company of Worcester, Mass.—which were two member companies of the American Thread Company to be formed in 1898. See meetings, 17 Apr., 26 Apr. 1891, 27 Apr. 1896, Book 2; Moody, J., The Truth about the Trusts (New York, 1968), 234Google Scholar.

⁶⁶ Kim, “From a Family Partnership,” 195.

⁶⁷ Meetings, 23 May, 17 July 1896, 27 May 1897, 24 Mar., 24 May, 28 July 1898, Book 2; “The Clark Mile-End Spool Cotton Company” in Investments 1.

⁶⁸ Between 1902 and 1908, the total property value of the four subsidiaries was £1.9 million to £2.1 million, whereas that of the home companies was £2.5 million to £2.8 million. J. & P. Coats, Property Valuation Books, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/18/4-7; J. & P. Coats, Rates of Exchange, UGD 199/1/20/1-2. According to Wilkins, J. & P. Coats employed more than six thousand persons in production and distribution in the United States immediately after 1896; the Pawtucket works had more than two thousand in 1897—and at least twenty-five hundred in 1910—and the capital invested there was in excess of $4 million. The History, 363, 367. Between 1890 and 1912, J. & P. Coats owned 29,803-29,990 ordinary shares ($100 per share) in the Conant Thread Company. “The Conant Thread Co.” in Investments 1 and 2.

⁶⁹ Bell, “Our Historical Heritage,” 7.

⁷⁰ Meeting, 28 July 1898, Book 2; “The Coats Thread Company” in Investments 1; “Spool Cotton Company” in Investments 2; meeting, 1 Aug. 1907, Minute Book 1903-18, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/1/3 (Hereafter, Book 3). Wilkins says, “in 1898 the name of [the Coats Thread Company] was changed to the Spool Cotton Company, which on January 1, 1899, took over the sales of the three brands of the Coats and Clark enterprises in the United States.” The History, 366. According to our sources, however, the new sales company was born on 7 Jan. 1899.

⁷¹ Meetings, 29 Mar., 9 May 1912, 24 July 1913, Book 3; Finance Committee meeting, 12 Dec. 1912, J. & P. Coats, Finance Committee Minute Book 2, 1904-13, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/1/22. Wilkins uses “J. & P. Coats (R.I.) Inc.” rather than “J. & P. Coats (Rhode Island) Inc.” The History, 362.

⁷² The capital of the Clark Thread Company increased considerably by $11.75 million to $12.5 million in 1917. Meetings, 24 Jan., 25 July 1917, Book 3. Wilkins tells about aspects of the restructuring in the American Thread Company. The History, 366. On the other hand, she cautiously speculates that “the Kearny mills … at some point in the 1880s or 1890s seem to have been merged with the Newark mills.” The History, 814 n. 111.

⁷³ Meetings 1 Aug., 29 Aug., 28 Sept. 1899, Book 2; 29 Aug. 1917, Book 3. According to Wilkins, J. & P. Coats began to buy Sea Island cotton regularly from the Florida company in 1889. The History, 815 n. 130. Our sources do not confirm such an exact date, but it seems probable that the two companies began to have a business connection sometime before 1890: “… the exceptionally low price of Florida cotton … a year's supply [should] be bought instead of nine months' as originally intended.” Finance Committee meeting, 29 Dec. 1890, Finance Committee Minute Book 1; “… it was not desirable to continue the arrangements of the old company [viz. J. & P. Coats before 1890] and take cotton on fixed terms, but there was no objection … to purchase cotton from [the Florida Manufacturing Company next season].” Meeting, 15 Feb. 1892, Book 2. Wilkins also says that J. & P. Coats took over the Florida company in cooperation with Fine Cotton Spinners' Association of Britain and the Clark Thread Company of New Jersey. What is clear is that the Clark Thread Company negotiated the deal on behalf of J. & P. Coats. Meeting, 1 Aug. 1899, Book 2. Manager of the Florida company as of 1901 was R. Barker. Meeting, 3 July 1901, Book 2.

⁷⁴ Meeting, 29 Oct. 1908, Book 3.

⁷⁵ As Schmitz, put it, “whilst upper management were freed to make long-term planning decisions and allocate resources throughout the organization, middle management remained responsible for routine operational procedures within their divisions.” Schmitz, The Growth, 39.

⁷⁶ Kim, “J. & P. Coats as a Multinational,” 535; Hunter, “Archibald Coats,” 329-30.

⁷⁷ Meetings, 25 Aug., 30 Oct. 1896, 25 Feb. 1897, Book 2.

⁷⁸ Finance Committee meeting, 28 Sept. 1899, Finance Committee Minute Book 1; Meetings, 29 Mar., 7 June 1900, Book 2; 30 Aug. 1916, Book 3.

⁷⁹ 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.

⁸⁰ Macrosty, The Trust Movement, 131; Whitney, S. N., Antitrust Policies—American Experience in Twenty Industries, vol. 1 (New York, 1958), 528Google Scholar; Wilkins, The History, 366; chairman's speech, J. & P. Coats, annual general meeting, 29 Nov. 1906, Book 3. According to Wilkins, “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.

⁸¹ Meeting, 17 July 1907, Book 3.

⁸² Meetings, 16 May, 27 June, 17 July, 1 Aug., 5 Sept. 1907, Book 3.

⁸³ Meetings, 2 Dec. 1909, 17 Feb., 24 Mar., 28 Apr., 2 June, 14 July 1910, Book 3.

⁸⁴ Meetings, 3 Apr, 6 Nov., 11 Dec. 1913, 15 Jan., 7 May 1914, Book 3; Finance Committee meeting, 30 July, 10 Dec. 1914, 14 Jan. 1915, J. & P. Coats Finance Committee Minute Book 3, 1913-1915, Glasgow University Archives, UGD 199/1/1/23; “English Sewing Cotton Company Ltd.” and “the American Thread Co.” in Investments 1 and 2; Wilkins, The History, 367.

⁸⁵ Chairman's speech, J. & P. Coats, annual general meeting, 10 Dec. 1914, Book 3. Wilkins explains in some detail the decree of 1914. The History, 367-8.

⁸⁶ Wilkins, The History, 368.

⁸⁷ Kim, “J. & P. Coats as a Multinational,” 527.

⁸⁸ The Times, Financial & Commercial Supplement, 31 Dec. 1906.

⁸⁹ Chairman's speech, J. & P. Coats, annual general meeting, 29 Nov. 1906, Book 3; quoted in The Times, Financial & Commercial Supplement, 31 Dec. 1906. See also The Economist, 2 Nov. 1907, 1864-5.

⁹⁰ In terms of capital. For the British ranking, see Payne, “The Emergence,” 539; Wardley, P., “The Anatomy of Big Business: Aspects of Corporate Development in the Twentieth Century,” Business History 33:2 (1991): 278CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hannah, L., The Rise of the Corporate Economy (London, 2nd ed., 1983), 187, 189, (1st ed., 1976), 118Google Scholar; Chandler, A. D., Scale and Scope—The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), 668–9Google Scholar. See also Shaw, C., “The Large Manufacturing Employers of 1907,” Business History 25:2 (1983): 52CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jeremy, D. J., “The Hundred Largest Employers in the United Kingdom in Manufacturing and Non-Manufacturing Industries in 1907, 1935 and 1955,” Business History 33:1 (1991): 97CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For the world ranking, see L. Hannah, “The Twentieth Century Rise and Fall of the World's Largest Firms,” (paper presented to an international seminar on entrepreneurship and economic development, Seoul, Korea, Nov. 1996), 35-8; Schmitz, The Growth, 30; Schmitz, C., “The World's Largest Industrial Companies,” Business History 37:4 (1995): 87CrossRefGoogle Scholar.