The weavers had industrial unit centered in their crone (an old woman) house. The women and children of the respective weavers’ family acted as auxiliary or helping workers. Sometimes they could be seen doing works like spinning threads. In the northern gangetic plains there were some differences. Large workshops were owned by rich men. These worked on the basis of all male master-apprentice team. Gradually European traders consolidated their position in case of Indian Ocean trade. In case of spot transactions contracts were made between trader and producer. This process in course of time was popularized and a bigger number and greater verities of intermediaries came to play a vital role in this process.
European traders emphasized on, quality, standardization and timely supply. These were some of the problems over faced by them. By 1800 the trade network via Europe was dwindling. Indian handicrafts had a huge demand in European market which decreased considerably. In India the disputed British revenue policy in rotaries areas lead to decline in demand in the rural areas. From 1820 machine made yarn and cloth began to reach Indian markets. As a result domestic textile industries which were largely dependent on hand running machines were at the verge of destruction. Increasingly concentrated markets and unrelated location of production also aggravated the problem. No permanent solution to this problem was found. Within the next 75 years European machine made clothes and yarn had no substitute, in Indian market. The impact, timing and significance of de industrialization could be seen in the decline of domestic Indian industries. As a result there was a large loss in employment in the handicraft textile sector. Prior to industrial exports from England 4-5 million persons all over India were engaged in the hand spinning industry. The decline in hand spinning and hand weaving industry in India took place gradually. In case of income loss, hand spinners were by and large domestic workers who performed spinning as part time workers. In lieu of their labor they used to take very small payment. This income loss was however not so important in comparison with the employment loss. Morris (1969) indicated that the rapid cheapening of cloth due to exports must have caused an expansion in demand. At the same time cheapening of yarn proved beneficial for the handloom weavers. Thus we can see that in the 19th century part of the handicraft textiles gradually disappeared while a part survived. At the same time some positive forces began to work in favor of the handicrafts. The handlooms did not merely survive but this sector saw a remarkable growth in the twentieth century