European Chemical Developments in the Nineteenth Century*
8
EUROPEAN CHEMICAL INDUSTRY IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY I.N. MARKWOOD National Production Authority, United States Department of Commerce, Washington, D. C.
chemical production of the world has reached a prodigious total of the order of $30 billion. United States output alone, which undoubtedly outstrips that of any other nation, amounts to ahout $15 billion. These figures immediately suggest that so productive an industry-in reality a group of industries-must have bad behind it an impressive story of growth and accomplishment. It is the aim of this article to report on certain phases of the beginning and rise of industrial chemical development in its European cradle, particularly in England, Germany, and France. The Industrial Revolution of a century and a half ago shook the masses of humanity from the lethargy of medieval primitiveness. In so doing, it mas bound to create a most profound stimulus to growth of the chemical industry since the simple fact is that the chemical industry is basic to practically all other industries: There can be no economic progress without the sustenance of chemistry and chemicals. This revolution asserted itself in England between 1770 and 1825 and in continental Europe subsequent to 1815, after Napoleon's downfall provided a measure of tranquility conducive to the development of peaceful arts. From this period on we find a series of significant events and accomplishments which accelerated the t.empo of chemical activity, culminating in the present multi-billion-dollar position.
This ascendancy, however, was not to last, for events stirring on the Continent soon after the middle of the nineteenth century shifted the center of gravity of chemical production away from the detached isle and planted the banner firmly in German hands. It takes two to make a bargain, and similarly it was not only Germany's progress but Britain's wekness that contributed to the changed pattern. Specific causes will be brought out hereafter. In like manner, France, although having lit the way in the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries with a succession of brilliant scientists who contributed greatly to chemical knowledge, failed to convert that knowledge into practical or commercial chemistry on a scale realized by sister countries. Conditions in France differed from those in Britain and Germany, notably by lwk of basic raw materials, and therefore the relatively poorer showing made by the industry there is quite understandable. What were the peculiar conditions that created in Britain by mid-nineteenth century the principal home of the chemical industry? 1. Abundant coal--of a type suitable for production of coal-tar. 2. Extensive salt deposits. 3. Availability of pyrite--all these basic raw m e terials in fortunate proximity. 4. Ready access to tidewater. 5. A thriving textile industnl, .. with its demand for chemicals. 6. A practical, business-minded people already versed in trade, domestic and foreign. 7. Political stability, with its benign influence on industry and commerce. 8. An empire in the making and therefore favored markets on a huge scale.
AiwuAL
GREAT BRITAIN
Understandably, from what has just been said, a recognieable chemical industry first took shape in Britain. That country, commercially minded more than others, had need for chemicals to maintain, among other elements in its economy, the budding textile industry. A world-wide demand for the cotton goods of northern England and Scotland provided fertile soil for marketing the numerous chemicals that go into a finished textile fabric. Once having initiated plant for some of the major basic chemicals, Britain acquired momentum enough to overshadow all other countries in the output and vigor of its chemical industries.
* A sympasium presented %* the 118th ti^^ of the American Chemical Society, Chicago, September 5, 1950.
This combination had the necessary elements for success; when we add to it the scientific and technical knowledge then available and yearning for exploitation we find added reason for achievement. Furthermore, that bane of infant industries-foreign competitiondid not yet stand in the way. This last circumstance, however, allowed only a temporary advantage and in
348
JULY, 1951
fact ultimately proved detrimental, as British chemical industrialists, softened by easy prosperity, succumbed later to the tight pressure put on them by the Germans and, to the surprise of the Germans themselves, the closing decades of the nineteenth century brought a reversal in leadership of the chemical industry. Bringing the picture closer to date we note that in the twentieth century leadership changed again, passing across the Atlantic where it rests by a comfortable margin in our own country. It is appropriate to introduce a historical review of the chemical industry with a word about sulfuric acid since this chemical is almost as commonplace in the industry and as necessary as water. Known to the alchemists of the sixteenth century, and earlier in the Middle Ages, sulfuric acid remained a costly material until its preparation in lead chambers was introduced by Roebuck and Garbett of Birmingham in 1746. I t became known as "English" sulfuric acid. With this chemical available in commercial quantities chemical industrial development was on its way. Possibly two developments took place in Britain in the early days of the industry that were exceedingly important: invention of bleaching powder, and Leblanc soda manufacture. Charles Tennant, a Glasgow merchant, was already using a solution of chloride of lime in 1788 for bleaching cotton cloth. The time required for this operation thereby shrank from months by the sun to a few hours by means of a chemical. He then developed a solid bleaching material, patented in 1799, made by passing chlorine gas over dry slaked lime which he called "bleaching powder." This was a revolutionizing product; soon bleaching powder became a leading industrial chemical. What is especially noteworthy is that the product created a demand for cheap chlorine which came to be satisfied by recovery from the Leblanc soda process. Tennaut's output of bleaching powder in 1799 amounted to 52 tons, worth £140 per ton. By 1805 production had trebled and the price fell to £112 per ton. By 1820 annual production was 330 tons and the price had further dropped to £60. A thriving export business developed, with the United States as one of the principal buyers. The name of Nicolas Leblanc stands out in industrial chemistry as a landmark. Through his process the world completely satisfied its ravenous need for soda ash and surrendered interest in barilla (natural sodium carbonate). Although France produced Leblanc, the unrequited inventor who died poor and unknown, it fell t o others to turn the invention to good account. A heavy tax on salt (£30 per ton) was lifted by the British government in 1823; this action paved the way for the Leblanc process to come into wide vogue in Britain after unsuccessful operation in France. James Muspratt, an Irishman, built a Leblanc plant at Liverpool in 1823. Other plants soon followed, one of these being located a t nearby Widnes on the Mersey River by John Hutchinson, who, only 25 years old and with hut a few month's experience, had 100 men working within a year. The day of reliance on natural soda
was over and Britain with its manufactured product not only supplied itself but became the world supplier. England is recognized as the home of the aniline dye industry. William Henry Perkin in his quest for a synthesis of quinine accidentally came upon the dye mauve in 1856. For the next quarter of a century the synthetic dye industry flourished in England. Under the title of Perkin & Sons, the scientist Perkiu began making dyes the year after his discovery. Read Holliday of Huddersfield in 1860 began making magenta, nitrobenzene, aniline, and toluidine. Roberts, Dale and Co. of Manchester also started production of aniline in 1860. One or two other English firms were attracted at about the same time to manufacture of the intermediates as well as the dyes themselves. I n 1864 Ivan Levinstein founded his well-known dye-manufacturing firm at Manchester and subsequently became the leading figure in Britain's fight to maintain the industry. On the Continent, French and German organizations rose to the opportunity in dyes. At Lyon, France, Renard Freres commenced in 1859. The Badische Anilin Co. erected a works a t Ludwigshafen in 1863 and in two years had 60 employees, thereafter to become the world's dominant dye firm. Scientists of the day recognized the original leadership in dyes that lay in British minds and hands. As a result they were attracted from other lands, principally Germany, to British plants where they contributed to the discovery of many new dyes. The influx of foreign chemists, however, came deliberately to absorb what it could and then take the knowledge back to the homeland, or perhaps did not find conditions conducive to a permanent connection. At any rate, a goodly representation of the great dye chemists of the era packed up after only limited stays in England, returned t o Germany, and there applied themselves to the glory of their native land. Thus, Hofmann returned in 1865, Caro in 1867, Martius about 1870, Witt in 1870. Coincident therewith some of the British dye firms, especially those of professorial antecedents, chose to suspend operations. Perkin retired in 1874, Nicholson in 1868, and Greville Williams in 1877. What had once been a company of brilliant research workers under the aegis of English industry dwindled to an ineffective handful. From that period on-until World War I compelled a revival-the sun set on British aspirations in the coal-tar dye field. It is said that had the nation been far-seeing and wise, the industry could have flounshed for longer than a quarter of a century. But unfavorable conditions within England, coupled with a vital upsurge in Germany, brought about the English defection. One of the weaknesses in Britain was the absence of a high-grade school of organic chemistry which could have provided a flow of trained personnel for dye research. Chemical education 150 years ago was anything but the organized system of today. At the beginning of the nineteenth century the great Swedish chemist, Berzelius, was the outstanding teacher. Another prominent personality was Gay-Lussac, noted French
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION
350
scholar who t,aught Iichig and Bunsen. Justus von Liebig, a man of imagination, originality, and sound bhinkinc. -, ~roceededt,o est,ahlishin Germanv " the world's leading school of organic chemistry. A dynasty of ex-. pert chemists grew up around him and these in turn (,rainedyounger gronps. It has been mentioned that Britain was a large pmducer of coal tar, a product of its coking industry. Much of this prior lo about 1890 was exported to Germany, which produced only a meager supply of its own. The Germans, with their acquired knowledge, skill, and facilities, transformed the tar into finished prodncts, consisting at first largely of dyes hut later pharmaleuticals and photographic chemicals also, and sold t,hese to England. Ult,imately, coal tar flowed freely from coking works of the mighty German steel industhy; England was left vistnally without a market for roal tar and fnrthermore withont much of a coal tar dye indnstry. In 1878 Adolf von 13ilycr. discoverer of synthptic indigo, said:
ditfused among lhe pcoplc, ennscquently new branches of chemical indust~ywerc eagerly sought for and exploited with the support of the people, the scientists, and the ca~italists. Whilc Eneland had eminent enei,, neers, it was short of chemical engineers, without an adeqnate supply of whom t,here could be no successful indnstly. The Germans made it a point to train large numbers of chemical engineers, thoroughly competent in the design and operation of chemical plants. These plant,s were often in association with engineering and machine shops which made the specialized equipment needed and which could produce apparatus of better or cheaper construction than was ohtainable in England. Levinstein argued forcefully with the instinct of a prophet that the salvation of his country's industry required the scrapping of numerous uneconomic Lehlanc soda plants in favor of ammonia-soda works for which cheap salt, cheap ammonia, cheap coal, and (!heap capital were a t hand. Also, pointing to the high price of sulfuric acid in England relative to Germany, he declared that if the acid makers would not remodel their plants or alter their process the con(krrnnny, which in rompwriwu with England and 1~'vanac poasesaes such great di~dvant,ttgeswith refercnrc to nxturill sumers should hand tognthcr to erect their own modern resources, has succeeded hy means of her intellectual act,ivity works. The Brit,ish wffered from ot,hcr disabilities. Their i n wresting from hoth rount~~ies a source of national ~vmlth. Germany no longer has to pay tribute to foreign nat,ions l h t is pat,ent laws enahled a forcigner to take out patents receiving such trihute from them, and the primary souroc from withont working t,hem in England. Thereby, the which t,his wealt,h originxtra has its home, not in G e r m ~ n yhut , Germans, Caro, Graebc, and Liehermann, with an i n England. It, i s onc of tlw most singular phenomena in tho clom~inof indurt~.ialr11rrniatt.pt,hat the chief industrial nation, English pat,ent on aliza~in,sqneezed Perkin out of the and t,he most, practiwl geoplr in the world, have been beeten in coveted prize-hy jnst onc day. Perkin thereupon had t,he endeavor to turn to protit,xhk wrrount the coal tar which it to remain content witah a license from the Germans. posriesses. The numrrous Grnuan color works purehaa: from Kngland the greater port,ion of thc products of the dist,illation This situation mas not rectified until passage of the Patent Law Amendment Act of 1907. This Act or coal tar, m d t,hey supply t,hree-fourbhs of the world with tho obliged foreign patent,ees t,o operate their British patwe must not rest on our Iaurck < r h nmade ft.on~it. HOWPY~I., for wo may he aow that England, which at present looks. on ents in Britain or to liccnsc others. I t resulted in forcquietly while we purchase hrr tar and convert it into colors ing German firms to build dye and intermediate works selling them to foreign nntions at high prices, will unheaitatingly cut off the murm of supply xs xoon a8 all the technical difficultici in England. The Rritish, with their concept of free trade, allowed foreign dyes to come in freely whereas lmve heen rrurmountod hg German mnnufacturers. British dyes were heavily taxed if they entered GerSpeaking eight ycars later, the English dyemalcer, many. This policy playctl directly into the hands of Ivan Levinstein, lamented that England had not cut off their competit,ors. The British government fonnd it coal tar from Germany, that England was still supply- necessary to impose a high excise tax on industrial ing three-fourths of Gelman requirements, while alcohol, which was required in large volume for making allowing Germany to snpply it with at least three- dyes, particulady of the basic type. The high internal fourths of t,he dyes used in England. Levinstein tax, along with stringent regulations, ran the cost of pointed out that indnstlial development in England for production so high t,hat in some cases the cost of the l.he preceding third of a renlury had been concentrated alcohol alone eqnaled the cost of the dye itself in Gerin cotton, wool, coal, and iron, to the neglect of other many. Inevitably, the mannfacture of basic dyes had industries, including the chemical. Fortunes had been to he abandoned. Later, in 1891 and 1902, the patent easy to come by in these staples over the yeam and the regulations wele modificd but the harm had already British mind centered on them. The general public been done. was in profonnd ignorance of industrial chemistry and In the matter of scientific journals, the Germans its importance, hence the want of enterprise in that showed their progressiveness with half a dozen publicadirect.ion. In England men of science mingled neither tions before the English had one. The Journal of the with the business community nor the lay public. In Society of Chemical Industry was not published until Germany the situation was qnite different: These was 1881. This jonrnal, however, became outstanding in no superabundance of accnmulated wealth, nor easy its field; it developed into a bulwark and mainstay of opportunities of acquiring it; the great nat,ural ad- the industry, accomplishing mnch in restoring Britain vantages did not exist; chemical knowledge was more to the high chemical eminence of t,he present day.
.
~
~
-
JULY,1951 GERMANY
The Industrial Revolut,ion came to Germany late and made slow progress up to about 1865. Industrial backwardness in that country paralleled its reactionary politics. In 1834, a protective customs union known as the Zollverein was established among the various German states and stimulated somewhat commercial development. Political consolidation in 1871 into the Empire sparked the meteoric rise of Germany to become the greatest industrial power in Europe. Chemistry was one of the principal factors thruugh which Germany's economy rose to power. Even during the quiescent period in t,he first half of the nineteenth century, the basis of German progress was laid in superior education. "Chemical knowledge in its various branches is further advanced than with us," admitted a promincnt Briton in 1840. During that period, Liebig the great teacher, revolutionized the t,hinking of chemists. I t was he who suggested the addition of chemicals to the soil to restore fertility and thereby started off the fertilizer indust~y. He showed that bones, after treatment with sulfuric acid, could coutribute their phosphorus to plants. The commercialization of this idea however first took place in England when John Rennet Lawes in 1843 established large works near London to make calcium superphosphate. The famous potash deposits of Stassfurt began to be worked systematically only in 1860. Discovered accidentally in 1867 while boring for rock salt, they possibly proved more valuable to Germany than their equivalent worth in gold. Out.put in 1861 was 2,000 tons; 50 years later, 11 million tons. Other natural resources include ordinary salt, pyrites, and coal. Once the inaction of pre-Empire years was sloughed off, these raw materials, as in Britain, put the Germans on a firm hasis chemical-wise. The late start was not altogether a disadvantage for Germany proceeded to profit from the latest techniques and eqnipment. She took hold of the superior ammonia-xoda process while the British clung to the outmoded Leblanc process. The price of Lasir: chemicals was brought down to less in Germany than in England. While raw materials were cheaper in England the end produot,~cost less in Germany. For more than half a r.entury England ruled the markets of the world in caustic soda, but the time came rrhen the home market was invaded by the German product and even gave preference to it. On soda ash in 1880 there was a 15 per cent price advantage in Germany; on sulfuric acid, 34 per cent,. The Germans early recognized that, the chemical industry was an important asset in their economy. They also recognized that the British had forged ahead in this field and it was therefore to their (the Germans') advantage to learn from the experienced British. They copied English equipment and methods; they sought employment with British firms, willing to work a t low to-acquire insight into thefunda&entals of the business. English machines were brought, to the testing shops in Berlin where they were t,ried. If suc-
cessful, a working model \\.as made for the museurn while the original was presentrtl to a progressive manufactu1er. The character of the German people differs from that, of Brit,ons and Frenchmen, according to a British anthority, who goes on to say t,hat it. is peculiarly adapted to succeed in an indust,ry such as t,he rheminal, where patience and met,hodiral protdure pay off in large rewards. Another source says that above all must be reckoned the basically high ment,al caliber of t,he people, with t,heir especial aptit.ude for material t.hings. "Eveyy man is intelligent and every man ihinks" was a Brit,ish estimate in 1840 of the Prussims. The most impressive case of Germany's rise to leadership is in counei:t,ion with the dye industry, for t,he development of which the German t,emperament seems p ~ r u l i ~ r adapted. ly FRANCE
France early produced distingoished chemists rib brought {,hat country to the forefront. as a center or chemical thought,. Not only was theoretical chemist,^ advanced but the industrial side as ~vell. The first. French snlfurir acid plant of indnst.ria1 caliber was erected in 1766. The Herolutionary and Napoleonic governments fostered the policy of st,at,e help lo industry, a t t,he same time allowing all possible freedom in its affairs. Leblanc's soda ash process, instituted ill 1792, had t,he active enconragement of the French ('ommitke of Public Safety. By 1830, 20 Leblanc plant,s were producing 30,000 tons of soda mh. The beelsugar industry developed under governmental support,. This industry, even in competition ait.11 import,ed cane sugar after the lifting of the blorkade, did so well t,hal, by 1830 the annual outpnt of some 400 small fact,ories reached 40,000 tons. 1mpro~-emmtsfollowed in sugar technology, notably through introdurtion of tripleeffect evaporat,ors in 1832: protlnrtion in 18i5 exceeded 450,000 t,ons. France pioneered in other dirert,ions. Gas for illumination was first t,ried a t Paris in 1815. An Indiarubber indust,~ycame into being before 1848 and by 1845 t,he daguerreotype photographir process was a going operation in Paris. The rhemistry of fats was explored and the result,s revolutionized the soap and candle trades. France has always been noted as a perfume renter. Think of a. per rapita ronsumption of 4 quarts annually in recent times to realize the significance of perfumery there. But the early promise of French chemist,l:\.failed tlo follow through industrially vrith t h e vigor shown by Rritain and Germany. For one t,l~ing,education was not, organized adequatrly to provide dl~eflow of engineers and technologists needed for larfe-scale industry; this, in sharp contrast t,n Grnnany. The natural resources of France, as of 100 years ago, compared unfavorably with those of rival rountries. There was salt, in the-east and in t,he southwst but no coal nearby. What coal there was came at. a relatively high price, with consequent handkap ti> the rornpet,itive posit,ion
352
of a coal-tar chemical industry. Confronted with arelative dearth of raw materials and the burden of extra transportation costs to acquire them, the French chemical industry was obliged to trudge along as a third-rate entity. As in the case of Britain, the French position in chemicals. senerallv s~eakine.remained retarded until the brekk-with Germany iPl914 forced a broad internal development. From then on, progress in chemical manufacture has measured up to the demands of a modern, industrial state. CONCLUSION
Britain, France, and Germany had an equal chance in the early years of the nineteenth century to establish chemical industries. Chemical science of that period
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION
was ripe for industrial development. Britain first took the lead from a combination of favorable circumstances, with France relatively backward and Germany preparing for ultimate primacy. The British people and government failed to appraise chemical i n d u s t i f o r the im~ortanceit wields in national and international affairs and allowed its industry to drift. Simultaneously the Germans, alert to the possibilities and well adapted to chemical research, forged ahead and became the world's leading chemical power. As the chemical history of the centuly is examined it is evident that nalural resources, proximity of raw materials, national character~stics,ability, foresight, and liberal governmental attitudes, all played important roles m advancing the world chemical industry.
