In chapter 7 it was argued that, up until 1890, the differential in the level of labour productivity experienced by Britain and the United States since the mid-century could primarily be attributed to the effects on the employment of labour within the mill, that the raw materials and the amount of labour-saving machinery used in each nation had had. From 1890, however, it becomes more difficult to explain the persistence of the productivity gap purely in terms of factors that influenced employment practices. As we saw from the data on machine speeds and capacities, as well as total productivity, given in chapters 3 and 5, it is from this date that a technological lead starts to appear in the United States. But if America was pulling ahead of the British technologically, the question must be asked why this was possible?

Differences in the technological paths adopted by each nation may provide an explanation, especially since in earlier years the American industry had made use of different types of machinery. This notwithstanding, however, the fact remains that the basic technique for making paper in the last half of the nineteenth century was for all intents and purposes the same in these countries. Moreover, even if we assume this not to be the case, it was the Cylinder machine – that was slightly more popular in the States – and not the Fourdrinier that had less potential for improvement and speeding up.