How the Telephone Transformed Victorian Britain

In the autumn of 1883, a strange news story fascinated the British public. It was a tale of fraud involving the new invention of the telephone.

On September 21, a young clerk named Robert Danks planned a deception in Birmingham. First, he forged a message that sent his boss out of town. Next, he called the office of his boss's friend, Alfred Young. Pretending to be his boss, Danks asked to borrow £5. The clerk at the other end was tricked and agreed. Danks collected the money and disappeared the next day.

The story was widely reported because of the clever new method of the crime. Commentators noted it was the first known case of telephone fraud, a landmark in the technology's short history.

But were people talking about telephones more than they were talking through them? When it was first introduced, everyone agreed that the telephone was a marvellous invention – though its purpose was far from clear. Was it a device for relaying the sounds of concerts and church sermons? Perhaps it was more useful in the mining industry, utilising the telephone microphone’s sensitivity to vibrations in order to monitor the quality and density of air, and so guard against the build-up of explosive gases?

Alexander Graham Bell developed the first practical telephone. He was a Scottish-born engineer who worked in Canada and the United States. Bell was given the U.S. patent for his telephone on March 7, 1876. The Bell Telephone Company started the next year, and soon tens of thousands of telephones were in use across America.

The first successful British demonstration happened in 1877. The first telephone exchanges opened in London two years later. By the time of Danks's fraud, small exchanges run by different companies were appearing across the UK, mostly serving local businesses.

At first, people were unsure of the telephone's purpose. Was it for relaying concerts or sermons? Could it be used in mines to detect dangerous gases? People did use it to talk, but a subscription was very expensive—often £15 or £20 a year. For decades, the telephone remained mostly a business tool. Early subscribers included barristers, large industrial companies, banks, doctors, and local governments.

Britain had fewer telephones than some other countries. This was partly because communication options were already good. The telegraph system was successful, the postal service was cheap and reliable, and messenger boys were readily available. The telephone did not have an immediate dramatic impact.

Also, a telephone's usefulness depended on who else had one. Many subscribers did not want a large network. They preferred smaller, exclusive networks. Privacy was a major concern. People did not want to be available to anyone in a public call office, or open to fraudsters like Danks. For these reasons, many were happy to keep the telephone network limited. No one imagined the average "working man" would need one.

Over the next few years, other medical professionals extolled the virtues of the telephone. “All of us must have felt the heartaching anxiety of longing to hear the voice of a dear friend when either ourselves lying on, or the friend being confined to, a bed of sickness,” noted the medical journal The Lancet.

Despite these benefits, many people feared that the telephone might pose risks, particularly to users’ mental health. In May 1879, The Times lamented that businessmen’s lives had become increasingly busy, unpredictable and reactive following the advent of telegraphy – a situation that would only get worse with the proliferation of telephones. Concerns about how telephony had increased the pace of modern life, and the associated stress that came with this, were commonplace in this period.

The telephone found an important early use in medicine. In August 1879, Eva Lückes, the superintendent at a children's hospital in Manchester, wrote to thank the Telephone Company. She said the telephones were most valuable in the fever ward. They allowed communication without the risk of spreading infection.

Other medical professionals praised the telephone. The journal The Lancet wrote about the comfort of hearing a loved one's voice during illness. Unlike speaking tubes, which could carry infection, telephones let contagious patients talk to family while staying isolated. After a scarlet fever outbreak in London in 1887, The Lancet suggested this remote contact had a healing power. Special telephones for hospital patients became more common in the following years.

Despite these benefits, many people worried the telephone was bad for mental health. In 1879, The Times said businessmen's lives had become more stressful and reactive because of the telegraph, and the telephone would make it worse. Fears about the increased pace and stress of modern life were common.

In towns such as Sheffield, Dundee, Swansea and Preston, local people also established their own exchanges. Despite patent disputes and fierce competition from the larger companies, these were able to operate for many years. Cleverly branding themselves as being run by and for local people, these companies charged lower subscriptions, enabling a broader range of businesses to sign up. They often inspired greater loyalty among their subscribers than the larger companies. Together, these factors meant that, by the late 1880s, towns such as Dundee and Sheffield had some of the most developed exchange telephone infrastructure anywhere in the country. For 30 years, therefore, provision was quite messy, with different companies and the GPO providing services in different areas. This situation ended only in 1912 when the NTC, the last remaining private telephone company, was nationalised.

In 1882, a science writer named Phoebe Lankester saw a telephone in a private home. She wrote, "I am not sure that I quite like the idea of its intrusion into our domestic scenes... no man's house can thenceforth be called his castle." This mix of excitement and worry was typical of the Victorian response.

The dark, isolated and stagnant conditions of mechanised conflict in the First World War changed everything. Suddenly, telephones became a lifeline – a crucial means of communicating between trenches and relaying news from the battlefront to headquarters. By 1920, the GPO had, at great cost, supplied 40,000 specially protected telephones to the army, meaning they were unable to invest in the development of telephone technology on the home front. Yet this expense was hidden from the public, who complained extensively about the failings of domestic telephony.

In most towns, telephone exchanges were set up by companies using Bell's patents. The largest was the National Telephone Company (NTC). However, in late 1879, the General Post Office (GPO) argued successfully that the telephone fell under its monopoly on telegraphic communications. Telephone companies now needed a GPO license to operate, and the GPO began opening its own exchanges.

In some towns, local people also started their own small exchanges. Despite competition from bigger companies, these local exchanges survived for years. They charged lower fees and inspired loyalty. By the late 1880s, towns like Dundee and Sheffield had some of the best telephone networks in the country. For thirty years, the system was messy, with different companies and the GPO providing service in different areas. This ended in 1912 when the last private company, the NTC, was nationalized.

Though valve technology had improved the telephone, individual voices remained hard to comprehend. Early telephone lines were noisy, open and messy, with background noise described in a Birmingham newspaper in 1888 as “a buzzing obbligato which gives a faint suggestion of bees, but has no precise resemblance to anything in nature”.

During the First World War, the telephone became a lifeline. The dark, static conditions of trench warfare made telephones crucial for communicating between the front lines and headquarters. By 1920, the GPO had supplied 40,000 specially protected telephones to the army. This was very expensive, and the GPO could not afford to improve the telephone system for civilians at home. People complained a lot about poor domestic phone service.

War needs drove innovation. Equipment had to be portable and speech had to be clearer. These goals were in tension, as making sound clearer often made devices heavier.

Better sound was also vital for the many soldiers who came home with hearing loss from artillery bombardments. Hearing loss was seen as a national problem after the war. Early telephone lines were noisy and messy. Background noise was once described in a Birmingham paper as "a buzzing obbligato."

There were also privacy problems. Signals could leak between overhead wires, letting people overhear private conversations. In 1897, a Glasgow merchant overheard his competitor's pricing. In 1893, another Glasgow subscriber listened in on a personal conversation, after which other listeners on the line started singing a popular song.

Many people struggled to use the telephone, even if they did not consider themselves deaf in other situations. It was strange to hear speech without seeing the speaker. The telephone transmitted a limited range of sound, so callers received much less information than in a face-to-face talk.

In 1923, the GPO issued an advice sheet. It told people how to speak clearly on the phone, like rolling the "R" in "three." In 1934, a man named HA Garratt complained to The Times that the telephone was "no louder or clearer now than it was 40 years ago." Faced with such complaints, the GPO looked for a solution.

When the telephone was invented, the deaf community hoped it could be a hearing aid. Bell's wife and mother were both deaf, and he had originally designed the device to help with hearing. Instead, early telephones mostly excluded people with hearing loss. Their development also led to stricter, narrower definitions of deafness.

The first amplified telephone for people with hearing difficulties was advertised by the GPO in 1924. It had a volume control stored in a separate wooden box. Many customers complained the box was embarrassing. An improved model came out in 1934. It was cheaper and had the volume control built into the handset.

Older telephones had a separate earpiece and mouthpiece. People with hearing loss could press the earpiece to the bone behind their ear, using bone conduction to hear. New integrated handsets combined the earpiece and mouthpiece, making this trick impossible. The GPO received many complaints about this change.

In Britain, categories of deafness were defined by hearing tests that used the GPO's "Artificial Ear" machine. This machine set narrow standards for "normal" hearing. People who did not fit the GPO's standards were categorized as needing a "telephone service for the deaf." So, the idea of deafness was shaped by the technology and priorities of the Post Office. Despite these limits, the GPO's expertise later helped create the first National Health Service hearing aid.

Today, people often say that technology meant to connect us can also isolate us. This tension between communication and isolation has existed since the telephone began. The telephone was always seen as a possible threat to mental health, and some parts of society were always left out.

Mobile phones have changed our behavior. Home landlines are becoming rare, replaced by smartphones. Many young people now prefer texting to talking on the phone. But as we move to more individual communication, we may have lost something from the shared family phone.

Some parts of modern phone culture would seem familiar to Victorians. In 1885, a London writer described a "telephone party": "There sat about 15 well-dressed persons, gazing straight in front... with a black tube held up to one ear. They heeded not the entry of anyone, and silence and inactivity reigned supreme."

The telephone has reshaped our lives for over a century. But worries about its effect on our well-being are nothing new.