The Gillows firm typified many large cabinetmaking firms of the 18th century–not the largest in England or America, but certainly in the top 5-10% of firms. For instance, in 1789 fifty men were employed in Lancaster alone–by then some representing several generations of workers from the same family as the Gillow family were quite devoted to their employees and gladly brought employees’ children on as apprentices. Not only did their dual premises in Lancaster occupy the equivalent of a city block, much three or four stories high, but they had London premises of considerable size on Oxford Street large enough to display large quantities of finished goods and provide work space for cabinetmaking of all types. Many of the men trained in Lancaster eventually worked in the London shop–and a ship ran constantly from Lancaster to London taking finished goods either pre-sold or to be offered in their fashionable shop. Quite an operation!
Robert and his son Richard increased the size of the firm substantially between 1757 and 1768 when the father retired (he had worked in cabinetmaking since beginning his apprenticeship in 1720!). In fact, during this time the value of the company in terms of wood stock, finished goods, and necessary hardware, etc. increased over 400%.
And it was during this period of great expansion that it became clear that mass-production was the key to continued success. We now know that shops from as small as four or five were seeking to speed up their production by specialization–this was more true in large firms. Turners, carvers, joint makers, inlay experts–all worked together on single projects. As painted and japanned surfaces became popular yet another specialization was added. (And remember, some specialists worked for many different cabinet shops–even Gillows bought ready made carvings, etc. from area specialists.) And finally they upholstered their seating furniture, did architectural work, and provided an array of coffins, etc. Again this was typical, not unusual.
What has become clear–and is utterly fascinating–based on the Gillows documents is the fact, incontrovertible, that several different men would work to create one piece, half of a set of chairs, etc. This flies in the face of everything we have often thought through the years–beliefs based on how small shops worked (the case almost exclusively in America). Over and over again the Gillow ledger states that of a set of twelve chairs, for instance, one man was paid for six, another for four and another for two–just an example. This was not specialization–it was clear that these men were creating the chairs for which they were paid. And several times men were reprimanded for not doing their work to the standard of the firm, creating sets which were not as “setty” as desired–they didn’t quite match!
An important caveat: cabinet shops wanted to produce sets that were sets, consistent veneering on multipart pieces, consistent interior construction, etc. Therefore they most often had one person responsible for each part of a chair, chest, and so on. When an important set of twelve of twelve chairs with demanding carved details was ordered in 1790, it took five months to complete the order due to the fact that their best carver was overwhelmed with work and they could not entrust the work to any other man on their staff. Gillows sent a note with the bill and the chairs noting the extreme demands of these fine chairs and expressing confidence that their splendid quality and beauty would “recompense” for the delay!
