Elite directors, London finance, and British overseas expansion: Victorian railway networks, 1860–1900†

Steven Toms,Shima Amini

doi:10.1111/ehr.13044

Abstract

AbstractThis article considers how international economic expansion impacts on the composition of elite groups on boards of companies. We examine, why, at the height of the British Empire, boards of national, imperial, and international railway companies, financed from London, were dominated by elites drawn differentially from the aristocracy, the military, finance, and politics. To investigate the reasons for these differences, we conduct a social network analysis of railway company boards in three countries during the second half of the nineteenth century. Results reveal that aristocratic directors were dominant in Britain, military directors in India, and financier directors in Argentina, suggesting that their influence drew on local knowledge, resource access, and network connections. They did not serve on boards for merely ornamental purposes.

Highlights

This article considers how international economic expansion impacts on the composition of elite groups on boards of companies
We examine whether the presence of elite directors reflected the expertise required by the international location of investment, including their ability to access resources, such as connections to human, social, and financial capital, and their ability to influence governments through political access and lobbying
The article uses social network analysis to identify dominant types of elite directors of companies listed on the London Stock Exchange (LSE), for British, British Empire, and international railway companies

Summary

Measuring elite network dominance

To investigate dominant elite groups, we obtained the names of all directors for all LSE quoted mainline railway companies with operations in Britain, India, and Argentina. To conduct a comparative analysis of the elite composition of boards, we used two census dates, 1869 and 1895. To assign individuals to elite sub-groups at each census date, we obtained information from biographical and newspaper sources.[31] Directors identified as aristocrats were classified according to their inheritance, date of conferment, and appearance at the two census dates.[32] Aristocrats with inherited titles were classified as aristocrats regardless of a subsequent business, political, or military career. Comparative cross-sectional analysis based on the two census dates facilitates our methodology, which is to conduct a social network analysis of elite directors, quantifying the dominance of elite groups and individuals within them. Primary Sources, https://www.gale.com/intl/primary-sources(accessed June 2020). Debrett, Debrett’s illustrated peerage; Cokayne, Complete peerage. Craig, ed., British parliamentary election results, 1832–1885; idem, ed., British parliamentary election results, 1885–

D10 D9

Britain

Argentina

Findings

Conclusions