THE AGE OF INDUSTRY

AMERICA 1865-1914

 

PART I : THE DEVELOPMENT OF INDUSTRY

 

The Industrial Revolution begins in Britain

·        Describe the factors that made it possible for the industrial revolution to first take place in Britain.

·        What relationship did advancements in agriculture have to the industrial revolution?

·        Explain the contribution that the textile industry made to Britain’s industrial revolution.

·        Identify why the perfection of the steam engine was the most important development of the industrial revolution.

·        What new philosophies did the Dissenters bring to the industrial revolution?

 

The term industrial revolution refers to a change in which goods began to be made in large quantities by machines rather than one at a time by hand.  In addition, manufacturing began to be done in factories rather than in the home.

The first country to undergo a widespread industrial revolution was Great Britain in the latter part of the eighteenth century.[1]  Britain had a number of advantages that enabled it to develop mass production prior to any other country.  Among these advantages was the presence of abundant natural resources such as coal, iron ore, and clay.  The compact size of the island, where no point is more than 70 miles from the sea, made the transportation of these resources relatively simple.  Britain’s profitable colonial empire also had created a class of wealthy merchants who had the money to invest in new enterprises.

In addition to these other advantages, Britain also enjoyed a degree of political stability and freedom that had evaded other European countries.  Britain had not been successfully invaded for seven centuries while wars ravaged the rest of Europe.  Unlike the absolute monarchies of continental Europe, British citizens could also be relatively assured that if they were to accumulate private property, it would be safe from government confiscation.  British political philosopher John Locke even described the very purpose of government as being “the preservation of property.”  Political liberty created a climate in which private businesses could flourish.

Any advancement in manufacturing had to be preceded by advancements in agriculture.  As long as the vast majority of the population needed to be employed in food production, there was no surplus labor to be devoted to industry.  In 1720, 85% of Britain’s population was rural and employed principally in farming.  Agricultural improvements began in the seventeenth century.  New crops such as turnips and carrots provided a food source that could be harvested in the winter.  New farming techniques such as crop rotation, planting crops in straight rows (made possible by Jethro Tull’s development of the seed drill) to facilitate easier weeding and harvesting, and the enclosure of fields not only increased food production but also decreased the need for farm labor.

Britain’s industrial revolution began with developments in the textile (cloth) industry.  Prior to the mid-eighteenth century, cotton and wool had been spun into thread by hand and then woven into cloth on hand looms.  This process was usually done in small quantities by farm laborers in their cottages at times when they could not work in the fields.  In the 1730s John Kay developed the Flying Shuttle that allowed cloth to be weaved much faster and in larger quantities.  Kay’s invention triggered an angry reaction from English weavers who saw it as a threat to their jobs.  Despite the sometimes violent protesters, the Flying Shuttle was widely in use throughout England by 1760.  It was, however, limited in value unless enough thread could be produced to keep up with the demands of faster weaving.  The British government offered a prize to anyone who could solve this problem.  It took only four years for James Hargreaves to develop the Spinning Jenny, which was capable of forming eight threads of cloth at the same time.  Five years later, Richard Arkwright’s Water Frame totally mechanized the spinning of thread.  Arkwright eventually developed a factory in Manchester, England that employed over 300 men in the production of cloth.  By 1787 Edmund Cartwright’s power loom had totally mechanized the weaving process and made it possible to produce mass quantities of woven cloth.  Within only thirty years, the production of textiles had gone from a slow process done by hand to a totally mechanized operation.

With the potential to create large factories came the problem of developing a reliable power source.  Early factories had to be located high in the hills, far away from urban centers, in order to take advantage of the only available source of power, the waterwheel.  The perfection of the steam engine by James Watt in 1769, which consumed only a third of the energy of the earlier Newcomen Engine, proved to be the key development that allowed industrialization to accelerate.  Combined with the earlier development by Abraham Darby of a way to produce coke (purified coal), which was a cheap and abundant source of energy, the steam engine made it possible to locate industries virtually anywhere.  A 100 horsepower steam engine was capable of doing the work of 880 men.  It could run 50,000 spindles, employ 750 workers, and produce 226 times more thread than before steam power.

By the late eighteenth century a change was coming over Britain that was unprecedented (had not occurred before) in the history of the world.  Numerous factories were being created, a network of canals was being dug to facilitate (make easier) the transportation of resources to factories and products to markets, and a national system of banking was being developed to provide loans and other forms of financing to businessmen.  Cities were rapidly expanding, filled with former agricultural laborers who were either no longer needed on the farm or who were attracted by the opportunity of employment in the growing factories.[2]  An entire new class of wealth was being created to rival the traditional forms of wealth from landholdings or shipping.

A large portion of this new wealth was in the hands of what the British called Dissenters.  Dissenters were Protestants such as Presbyterians, Quakers and Unitarians who did not belong to the Church of England (The Church of England was an established church, maintained by the government with the monarch as its head.).  These Dissenters were usually excluded from government, classical universities, and the nobility.  With little other opportunity for advancement, they focused their attention on trade and industry.  Their religious doctrines (beliefs) emphasized hard work in which material success was a sign of God’s blessing.  Excluded from the leading universities, they set up their own schools where they rejected the classical emphasis on Greek and Latin and instead focused on subjects such as mathematics, science, and business organization.  Following their example, soon almost all education was quickly harnessed to the needs of an industrial society.  As a standard teaching text, William Bagley’s Classroom Management, later stated: “One who studies educational theory aright can see in the mechanical routine of the classroom the educative forces that are slowly transforming the child from a little savage into a creature of law and order, fit for the life of civilized society.”  The Dissenter’s belief that wealth was good, hard work produced success, and that education should be practical and economically profitable was perfectly suited to the demand of the new industrial age, and the leading developers of American industry also later adopted these ideas.[3]

Early American Industrial Development

·        Why did conflict with Britain accelerate the development of American industry?

·        What role did Alexander Hamilton play in early American industrial development?

·        What is a tariff?  Why was it important in early American history?

·        Why was most early industry located in the Northeast?

·        What was the first U.S. industry to adopt the factory system?

·        Describe the contributions of Samuel Slater and Francis Cabot Lowell to the development of American industry.

·        Describe the growth of U.S. industry between 1840-1860.

 

Prior to the Civil War American industry had developed primarily as a result of conflict with Britain.  In colonial times there was very little American manufacturing, as manufactured goods were primarily imported from Britain.  Even with the high cost of trans-Atlantic shipping, goods made in Britain were both of higher quality and lesser price than those made in America.  The economic boycotts of British goods that preceded the Revolutionary War and the war itself, however, cut off America from its primary source of manufactured goods.  In response, small American enterprises developed to produce products such as cloth, shoes, and guns.

When the Revolutionary War ended Britain was determined to win back the American markets for its goods that had been closed to its manufacturers and merchants for over ten years.  The young American industries were in no position to compete with the older, more established British companies, and the progress made toward developing American industry during the revolution was virtually destroyed in the first five years of the peace.  This collapse of American industry was one of the contributing factors that led the United States to abandon its first form of government, the extremely weak Articles of Confederation, in favor of the much stronger constitution written in 1787.  One of the key features of the new constitution was the ability of the national government to impose tariffs, or taxes on foreign goods.  The purpose of a tariff is to benefit domestic industry by making competing foreign imports more expensive.  The national tariff was a key part of President Washington’s Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton’s plans to develop American industry.  Hamilton had been the country’s primary advocate of domestic industry.  In 1791 he delivered his famous Report on Manufactures to Congress, pointing out that the development of industry was crucial to the nation’s independence: 

A constant and increasing necessity … for the commodities of Europe, and only a partial and occasional demand for their own, in return, could not but expose [the American people] to a state of impoverishment, compared with the opulence to which their political and natural advantages authorize them to aspire….  Not only the wealth, but the independence and security of a country appear to be materially connected with the prosperity of manufactures….  … it is the interest of the United States, generally, to encourage manufactures….[4]

Although the tariff encouraged the development of some industry, mostly in the northeastern part of the country where soil conditions and weather made farming less profitable; it was the importation of textile technology from England as well as another conflict with Britain, culminating (climaxing) in the War of 1812, that provided an opportunity for American manufacturing to establish itself once and for all.  Again denied foreign imports, Americans were encouraged to provide for themselves.

Before the War of 1812 most U.S. manufacturing took place within households or in small, individually operated workshops.  Most goods were produced by hand and sold in local markets.  Gradually, however, improved technology and increased opportunities for commerce (trade) stimulated the beginnings of change.  This change came first in the New England textile industry. 

In 1789 a 22-year-old man landed in New York City.  Inside his head he carried the secrets that would furnish the beginnings of the industrial revolution in the United States.  Samuel Slater had grown up in the shadow of one of Richard Arkwright’s textile mills in Derbyshire, England.  Apprenticed to work in a mill owned by a friend of his father, Jedediah Strutt, the young Slater had been quickly fascinated by its technology.  In his seven years of apprenticeship and an additional year as a machinery supervisor, he became knowledgeable in every facet of the cotton-spinning industry.  Eager to strike out on his own but lacking the money to start his own factory, Slater learned of the huge rewards being offered in the United States to anyone who could develop textile machinery that would allow the Americans to compete with the British.  Britain, of course, closely guarded its technological advantage.  Skilled machinists, such as Slater, were prohibited from leaving the country and the penalty for attempting to take textile machinery or plans for it out of England was as high as twelve years imprisonment.  Slater was not deterred.  Disguised as a poor farmer, he journeyed to America where he wrote to a rich merchant, Moses Brown, who had advertised for a manager of a cotton-spinning mill he intended to start in Rhode Island: “I flatter myself that I can give the greatest satisfaction, in making machinery, making good yarn … as I have had opportunity, and an oversight of Sir Richard Arkwright’s works, and in Mr. Strutt’s mill upward of eight years.”

Slater and Brown (along with Brown’s son-in-law, William Almy) soon became partners.  By December of 1790, Almy, Brown & Slater were producing yarn from machines that Slater had reconstructed from memory.  In its first ten months of operation, their Pawtucket mill produced 8,000 yards of cotton yarn.  Within two years, Slater had already earned $5,000 from his partnership at a time when the yearly wages of a skilled worker were less than $400 per year.  Eli Whitney’s development of the cotton gin in 1792, a machine that cleaned and removed the seeds from cotton, insured an almost unlimited supply of cotton for the spinning factories.  Although workers in the mills earned only ten to twenty-five cents per day, this was seen as a huge improvement over the difficult life of the New England farmer.  An entire family working in one of the mills could earn over $600 a year, three times the income of a small farmer.

This factory system, as it was to be called, spread rapidly in the 1810s.  The first census (counting) of manufacturing in 1810 revealed 269 cotton and 24 woolen mills in the country.  An embargo (refusal to trade) of all British and French goods begun in 1807 and the War of 1812 soon spurred a tremendous expansion.  Between 1807 and 1815 the total number of cotton spindles increased dramatically, from 8,000 to 130,000.  Until 1814 the textile factories produced only yarn and thread; the weaving of cloth was left to families operating handlooms at home.  Then Boston entrepreneur (business developer and owner) Francis Cabot Lowell developed a power loom better than its English counterpart.  In 1813 Lowell organized the Boston Manufacturing Company and, at Waltham, Massachusetts, founded the first mill in America to carry on the processes of spinning and weaving under a single roof.  Lowell's company was an important step in revolutionizing American manufacturing.  Within twenty years his company had expanded to the point that it employed 7,000 workers.  Young women who left their farm families to work for several years in the mills supplied much of this labor.  In what became known as the Lowell System, these young women (usually 15-30 years old) lived in strictly supervised dormitories and earned $6-$10 per week to send to their farm families or save for marriage.

In the shoe industry as well, mass production through the specialization of tasks was expanding.  By the 1830s most of the work in shoe factories continued to be done by hand, but manufacturing in the newer establishments was increasingly divided among men and women who, in a careful division of labor, specialized in one or another of the various tasks involved in production.  Private cobblers producing shoes for individual customers remained the largest source of shoe manufacturing, but the future of the industry was more clearly suggested by factories producing large numbers of identical shoe parts in ungraded sizes and without distinction as to rights and lefts.  Shoes were then “put out” to individual cobblers for the final sewing.  As with textiles, the new shoe factories emerged first in Eastern Massachusetts.  New England’s abundant hills and streams provided the fast moving water necessary for the waterwheels that powered the new factories.  The development of a sewing machine capable of sewing uppers into the soles allowed the entire shoemaking process to be mechanized by the 1850s.

By the 1830s factory production was spreading from textiles and shoes into other industries as well; and manufacturing was moving beyond Massachusetts and New England to become an important force throughout the American Northeast.  Between 1840 and 1860, American industry experienced a steady and, in some areas, spectacular growth.  In 1840 the total value of manufactured goods produced in the United States stood at $483 million; ten years later the figure had climbed to over $1 billion; and by 1860 it reached close to $2 billion.  For the first time, the value of manufactured goods was approximately equal to that of agricultural products.

The most noticeable change in American life in the 1840s and 1850s was the rapid development of the industrial economy of the Northeast.  Industrialization, which had begun slowly in the years immediately following the War of 1812 and had gathered force in the 1820s and 1830s, now burst forth as a major factor in the Northern economy.  Of the approximately 140,000 manufacturing establishments in the country in 1860, 74,000 were located in the Northeast.  They included, moreover, most of the larger enterprises.  Although the Northeast had only a little more than half the mills and factories of the nation, it produced more than two-thirds of the manufactured goods.  Of the 1,311,000 workers in manufacturing in the United States, about 938,000 were employed in the mills and factories of New England and the Middle Atlantic states.

Industry and Social Change

·        Describe how the growth of industry affected the Northeast.

·        Describe the two main sources of the growth in urban population.

·        What were the main sources of immigration to the U.S. prior to the Civil War?

·        How did industrialization accentuate the differences between the North and the South?

·        Describe working conditions in the early factories.

·        How did U.S. unions differ from European ones?  What factors made it so difficult for unions to organize workers?

 

One of the most profound changes in the nature of Northeastern society in the antebellum (pre-Civil War) period was the growing size of its cities.  Between 1840 and 1860 the population of New York, for example, rose from 312,000 to 805,000 (1.2 million if Brooklyn, which was then a separate municipality, is included.).  Philadelphia's population grew over the same twenty-year period from 220,000 to 565,000, and Boston's from 93,000 to 177,000.  By 1860, 26% of the population of the free states was living in towns or cities, up from 14% in 1840.  The percentage was even higher in the most highly industrialized states of the Northeast.  In the South, by contrast, the increase of urban residents was only from 6% in 1840 to 10% in 1860.

The enlarged urban population was in part simply a reflection of the growth of the national population as a whole, which rose by more than a third from 23 million to over 31 million in the decade of the 1850s alone.  It was also, however, the result of the flow of people into the cities from two different sources.  The first, and for a time larger source, was farming families of the Northeast who were being forced off their lands by competition from farmers west of the Appalachian Mountains.  The second source was immigration from Europe.  Between 1830 and 1840 only a relatively small number of foreigners had moved to the United States, about 500,000 in all.  Beginning in 1840, however, the floodgates opened.  The number of immigrants arriving in 1840 (84,000) was the highest for any one year so far in the century.  In the ensuing years even that number would come to seem insignificant.  Between 1840 and 1850 more than 1.5 million Europeans moved to America.  In the last years of the decade the average number arriving annually was almost 300,000.  Of the 23 million people in the United States in 1850, approximately 10% were foreign-born.  Still greater numbers arrived in the 1850s.  Almost half the population of New York City in the 1850s consisted of recent immigrants.  In St. Louis, Chicago, and Milwaukee, the foreign-born outnumbered those of native birth.  Few immigrants settled in the South due to the lack of demand for unskilled labor and high land prices.  Only 500,000 foreign-born residents lived in the slave states in 1860, and a third of these were concentrated in Missouri.

The newcomers came from many different countries and regions: England, France, Italy, Scandinavia, Poland, and Holland, but the overwhelming majority of these immigrants came from Ireland and Germany.  In 1850 the Irish constituted approximately 45% and the Germans over 20% of the foreign-born in America.  By 1860 there were more than 1.5 million Irish-born and approximately one million German-born people in the United States.  Several factors accounted for the prevalence of immigrants from Ireland and Germany: widespread poverty caused by the economic dislocations of the industrial revolution in Europe, famines resulting from the failure of the potato and other crops, dislike of English rule by the Irish, and the collapse of the liberal revolution of 1848 in Germany.

As urban centers now grew rapidly in the northeastern part of the country, class divisions became more visible and pronounced.  New industrial capitalists and financiers accumulated fortunes only rarely seen in earlier times.  A growing urban middle class of managers became an ever more important factor in American society, and a rapidly expanding industrial labor force created a distinct working class.  The growing size of the factories, as well as emerging class distinctions, changed forever the relationship between employers and laborers.  It had been common in the early years for mill owners to treat their workers with a paternal (fatherly) concern that at times softened the conditions of living and working in the new and foreign environment of the factory.  With the expansion of industry such niceties were quickly forgotten.  No longer did workers live in neat boardinghouses or dormitories carefully maintained and supervised by their employers.  Instead, they were generally left to their own devices to find whatever accommodations they could in the squalid (unclean) factory towns that were rapidly growing up.  No longer were the conditions of factory labor monitored so as to reduce the hardship of the workers.  Instead, factories were becoming large, noisy, unsanitary, and often dangerous places to work.  The average workday was extending to twelve, often fourteen hours; and wages declined, so that even skilled male workers could hope to earn only from $4 to $10 per week, while unskilled laborers were likely to earn only about $1 to $6 per week.  Industrialization greatly widened the gap between the rich and the poor.  In Cincinnati, a rapidly industrializing center in the Midwest, the richest 10% of the population had held about one third of the wealth in 1790.  In 1860 they held more than two-thirds.  The poorest half of the population held about one-eighth of the wealth in 1790 but only one-fortieth in 1860.[5]  Women and children, whatever their skills, also earned less than men.  Of the country’s six million workers in 1850, half a million were women.  Most women were employed as domestics (such as cooks and maids), but almost 200,000 worked in factories, usually in the textile industry.  Conditions were still not as bad as in most factory towns in Britain and Europe but neither were American factories the models of cleanliness, efficiency, and human concern that many people had once believed them to be.

It was in these conditions that American workers began to organize themselves into unions for their protection.  Early efforts to establish worker’s organizations to demand better wages and shorter hours were frustrated by court rulings that outlawed them as “criminal conspiracies.”  This began to change in 1842 when the Massachusetts Supreme Court legalized unions and held that the strike was a lawful weapon in Commonwealth v. Hunt.  Other state courts gradually accepted the principles of the Massachusetts decision, but the union movement of the 1840s and 1850s remained generally feeble (weak) and ineffective.  What organization there was among workers usually occurred among limited groups of skilled workers.  These early unions often had more in common with pre-industrial guilds (associations of craft workers, beginning in medieval times, that regulated the standards of their trade) than with modern labor organizations.  Their primary purpose was in most cases to protect the favored position of their members in the labor force by restricting admission to the skilled trades.  As early as the 1830s a few local craft unions (associations made up of workers who specialized in the same particular skill) had begun to associate with one another to form national organizations.  More such associations emerged in the 1850s, among them the National Typographical Union, founded in 1852, followed by the Stone Cutters in 1853, the Hat Finishers in 1854, and the Molders and the Machinists, both in 1859.  Virtually all the early craft unions excluded women, even though female workers were numerous in almost every industry.

Despite modest efforts at organization and protest, what was most notable about the American working class in the 1840s and 1850s was its relative passivity (lack of aggression).  In Britain workers were becoming a powerful, united, and often-violent political force.  They were engaging in widespread strikes, organizing politically, and demanding widespread social change.  In America, nothing of the sort happened.  Many factors combined to explain this difference.  Among the most important was the flood of immigrant laborers into the country following 1850.  The newcomers were usually willing to work for lower wages than native workers; and because they were so numerous, manufacturers had little difficulty replacing disgruntled or striking workers with eager immigrants.  Ethnic divisions and tensions both between natives and immigrants, and among the various immigrant groups themselves, often caused working-class resentments to be channeled into internal bickering rather than complaints against employers.  A second factor in limiting labor militancy was the fact that many Americans viewed their membership in the laboring class as only temporary.  Opportunities for advancement were frequently available and cheap land, especially on the western frontier, gave disgruntled workers other alternatives.

Changes in Technology Encourage Industrial Growth

·        What were the main technological factors that led to the development of American industry prior to 1860?  Why was technological innovation so crucial to the development of American industry?

·        How did industrial development contribute to the causes of the Civil War?

·        What effect did the development of railroads, the telegraph, and newspapers have on the U.S.?

 

From the beginning American industry relied heavily on technology for its growth.  Prior to the 1840s labor was scarce in the United States, at least in comparison to other industrializing countries, and there was great incentive for entrepreneurs to improve the efficiency of their productive enterprises by introducing new laborsaving devices.  Machine technology advanced more rapidly in the United States in the mid-nineteenth century than in any other country in the world.  The government helped encourage innovation by establishing a strong patent system to protect the inventors of new technologies and guarantee that they would profit from their inventions.[6]  Technological change was so rapid, in fact, that manufacturers often built their new machinery exclusively out of wood; by the time the wood wore out, they reasoned, improved technology would have made the machine obsolete (out of date).  By the end of the 1830s American technology, particularly in textile manufacturing, had become so advanced that industrialists in Britain and Europe were beginning to travel to the United States to learn new techniques, instead of the other way around.  At the first World’s Fair, held at London’s Crystal Palace in 1851, Americans won more prizes, compared to the number of entries submitted, than any other country.

A major advancement was the ability to manufacture interchangeable parts that could be substituted for each other in a product.  Eli Whitney is usually credited with the establishment of the first U.S. factory to employ this new method, producing interchangeable musket parts in 1798, five years after his invention of the cotton gin.  The concept of interchangeability was of particular importance to the U.S. military in the manufacture of guns.  A defective part on the battlefield could simply be exchanged for a replacement rather than replacing the entire weapon or crafting an individual replacement.  The ability to manufacture interchangeable parts required precision machinery capable of reproducing a given operation exactly time after time.  A gunstock-turning lathe, developed by Thomas Blanchard in 1819 at the Springfield, Massachusetts Armory, proved to be the key innovation in this field.  This technology soon spread to other enterprises and became known as “the American System of Manufactures.”  Interchangeable parts also led to specialization in the work force.  A single, often relatively unskilled and poorly paid, worker could turn out hundreds of identical pieces per day. 

The new industrial economy could not have developed without an adequate transportation system.  New forms of transportation were essential for moving raw materials to the factories and for moving finished goods out to market.  In the 1820s and 1830s canals provided vital links between various parts of the country.  In the fifteen years following the completion of the Erie Canal in 1825, over three thousand miles of canals were built.  The Erie Canal allowed goods to be transported from the Atlantic to the Midwest and encouraged trade between the northeast and the northwestern parts of the country.[7]  After 1840 railroads gradually replaced canals and all other forms of transport.  Railroads enabled western farmers to ship their products cheaply and quickly to eastern markets and thus helped to force many eastern farmers out of business.  In 1840 the total railroad trackage of the country was only 2,818 miles, but by the end of the decade the figure had risen to 9,021 miles.  An even more dramatic burst of railroad construction occurred in the 1850s with the amount of trackage tripling between 1850 and 1860.  The Northeast developed the most comprehensive and efficient system, with twice as much trackage per square mile as the Northwest and four times as much as the South.  By 1853 four major railroad lines crossed the Appalachian Mountains, connecting the Northeast with the Northwest.  Chicago became the rail center of the West, served by fifteen lines and more than a hundred daily trains.  The railroads were essential in forging ties between the industrial Northeast and the growing agricultural regions of the Northwest.  This emerging alliance not only became crucial to the growth of the American economy, but also to the sectional tensions that would isolate the agricultural South and eventually lead to civil war.

Facilitating the operation of the railroads was another important technological innovation: the telegraph.  The telegraph had burst into American life in 1844 when Samuel Morse, after several years of experimentation, succeeded in transmitting from Baltimore to Washington the news of James K. Polk's nomination for the presidency.  The Morse telegraph provided the ideal answer to the problem of long-distance communication.  Its lines extended along the railroad tracks, connecting one station with another and aiding the scheduling and routing of the trains.  Its development was a key to the nation's political and economic development.  It permitted instant communication between distant cities, tying the nation together as never before.  And yet, ironically, it also helped reinforce the growing division between the North and the South.  As with railroads, telegraph lines were far more extensive in the North than in the South; and they too helped to link the Northeast to the Northwest (and thus to separate them further from the South).  By 1860 more than 50,000 miles of wire connected most parts of the country; and a year later, the Pacific telegraph, with 3,595 miles of wire, was opened between New York and San Francisco.  By then, nearly all of the independent lines had been absorbed into one organization, the Western Union Telegraph Company.

New forms of journalism also served to draw communities together into a common communications system, as well as to reveal more clearly to different regions their differences from one another.  In 1846 Richard Hoe invented the steam cylinder rotary press, making it possible to print newspapers rapidly and cheaply.  The introduction of the rotary press, together with the development of the telegraph, made possible much speedier collection and distribution of news than ever before.  Also in 1846 the Associated Press was organized for the purpose of cooperative newsgathering by wire.  Major metropolitan newspapers began to appear in the larger cities of the Northeast.  Horace Greeley's Tribune, James Gordon Bennett's Herald, and Henry J. Raymond's Times were all published in New York, and gave serious attention to national and even international events.  As a result, they had substantial circulations beyond the city.

The Post Civil War Business Boom

·        In what ways did industrialization contribute to the causes of the Civil War?

·        How did the Civil War accelerate industrial development?

·        What were the six main factors that fueled the industrial growth following the Civil War?

 

In many ways the industrial growth of the Northeast and its increased economic ties to the Northwest, encouraged by the rapid improvement of transportation and communications, were more significant causes of the Civil War than the issue of slavery.  Northern business leaders believed that they were held back by the control that representatives of the agricultural South held in Congress.  The tariff had been a bitter issue between North and South from the moment that it had been proposed by Hamilton during Washington’s presidency.  Northerners viewed the tariff as a vital protection for their growing industries while the South, having no incentive to develop significant industries because of the enormous profits in cotton farming, viewed it as increasing the cost of every manufactured item that they sought to buy.  Further angering the South was the belief that the proceeds of the tariff went mainly to finance the development of the railroads that mainly benefited northern business concerns.  Even more importantly, because the South had little industry, it failed to attract many immigrants.  As a result, the population of the North soon greatly outnumbered that of the South.  By the 1850s southern leaders were feeling totally isolated and were fearful that the North would completely dominate them politically.  The election of Abraham Lincoln in the 1860 confirmed southern fears, as Lincoln won the presidency despite almost no support in the South.

The ensuing Civil War did not, as many people once believed, transform the North from an agricultural to an industrial society.  Industrialization was already far advanced when the war began.  In 1820 six times as many men and women had been involved in agriculture as in manufacturing.  By 1860 this ratio had dropped to less than four to one.  The war served to only further advance the northern industrial economy.  Government contracts for war supplies expanded business.  Coal production increased by nearly 20% during the war.  Railroad facilities improved, mainly through the adoption of a standard gauge (track width).  The loss of farm labor to the military forced many farmers to increase the mechanization of agriculture.  The political power of the South, held before the war by Democrats opposed to the interests of industry, was crushed and the party of the industrial North, the Republicans, would enjoy a decade of unchallenged rule.

Not all the effects of the war were so positive, even in the North.  Industrial workers experienced a substantial loss of purchasing power, as their wages failed to rise fast enough to keep pace with the substantial wartime inflation.  Prices in the North rose by more than 70% during the war, while wages rose only about 40%.  The liberalization of immigration laws began to introduce additional competition into the labor market and helped keep wages low.  The increasing mechanization of production threatened many skilled workers with the loss of their jobs.  One result was a substantial increase in union membership in many industries and the creation of a group of national unions for coal miners, railroad engineers, and other workers.

Virtually all the forces that contributed to American economic growth in the years 1865-1900 existed in some form before the Civil War, but there had been other forces at work in those years to inhibit economic development.  Perhaps most important, conservative southern planters, exercising great political power, had served as an obstacle to governmental policies favoring northern business interests.  The years of war and Reconstruction (the ten years following the war) removed that obstacle and, in the 1870s and 1880s, the interests of northern businesses came to dominate the government.

Between the Civil War and the start of the twentieth century, the number of Americans engaged in manufacturing tripled and the United States passed Britain as the world’s leading industrial power.  Many factors contributed to this dramatic industrial growth.  The United States had an abundance of basic raw materials and energy sources, especially coal, iron, timber, petroleum, and waterpower.  For example, the mining of coal increased from 14 million tons in 1860 to 100 million tons in 1884.  There was also a large and growing supply of labor, the result of two great migrations—the movement of American farmers into the cities and the movement of European peasants across the ocean to the nation's industrial centers.  American industry benefited as well from a remarkable technological inventiveness widely heralded as “Yankee ingenuity” which created the necessary machinery and new industries for industrial growth.

A talented, ambitious, and often ruthless group of entrepreneurs, known to some as “captains of industry” and by others as “robber barons,” developed new financial and administrative structures capable of organizing large-scale production and distributing manufactured goods to a national market.  The market for goods itself was growing as a result of the new railroad network, the rapidly expanding population and greater wealth, as well as a host of new marketing techniques.  Finally, the federal government actively worked to support industrial growth.  Although it resisted most pressures to interfere with the prerogatives (privileges) of business owners, it worked to promote corporate growth.  It made public resources available to private businesses on generous terms, erected protective tariff barriers against foreign competition, established a new banking and currency system, and provided direct subsidies (grants of assistance) of land and money, especially to the railroads.

The remarkable growth that resulted from these six factors did much to increase the wealth and improve the lives of many Americans.  These benefits, however, were far from equally shared.  While the captains of industry and the growing middle class were enjoying a prosperity without precedent in the nation's history; workers, farmers, and others were experiencing an often painful ordeal that slowly edged the United States toward a great economic, social, and political crisis by the end of the century as the gap between the rich and the poor continued to grow.

Innovation and Industrial Growth

·        What contribution did the following make to industrial development: Bell, Edison, Sholes, Ritty, Burroughs, Bessemer, Drake, Swift, Borden, Duke, Marconi, and Ford?

·        Why did Pittsburgh become the center of the U.S. steel industry?

 

No single factor can be called the most important prerequisite (requirement) of industrial growth.  Indeed, industrialization depends above all on the working together of many forces at once.  One of the most important of such forces was the emergence of new technologies and the discovery of new materials and productive processes.  In the last decades of the nineteenth century, inventions appeared at a dizzying pace.  In the entire history of the United States up to 1860 only 36,000 patents had been granted.  For the period from 1860 to 1890, the figure was 440,000.  Comparable technological advances were occurring in Europe in these same years, and Americans benefited from those as well.

Many of the postwar inventions and discoveries were in the field of communication.  In 1866 Cyrus W. Field succeeded in laying a transatlantic telegraph cable to Europe.  During the next decade, Alexander Graham Bell developed the first commercially useful telephone; and by the 1890s, the American Telephone and Telegraph Company had installed nearly half a million phones in American cities.  Other inventions that speeded the pace of business organization were the typewriter (by Christopher L. Sholes in 1868), the cash register (by James Ritty in 1879), and the calculating or adding machine (by William S. Burroughs in 1891).

Another important technological breakthrough was the development of steel.  An Englishman, Henry Bessemer, developed a process by which iron could be transformed into steel, a much more durable and versatile material, in the 1850s.  The Bessemer process consisted of blowing air through molten iron to burn out the impurities and allowed mills to manufacture the same amount of steel in fifteen minutes that had been previously taken them a full day to produce.  This technique made possible the production of steel in great quantities and in large dimensions, thus facilitating use of the metal for the production of locomotives, steel rails, and ultimately, heavy girders for the construction of tall buildings.

The steel industry emerged first, unsurprisingly, where its key resources already existed, in Western Pennsylvania and Eastern Ohio, a region where iron ore and coal were abundant.  Pittsburgh quickly became the center of the steel industry.  The rapid growth of the steel soon stimulated the development of new sources of iron ore in other areas.  The mines of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan were furnishing more than half the country’s supply of iron ore by the 1870s.  Beginning in the 1890s the extensive Mesabi Range in Minnesota developed into the greatest ore-producing region in the world.  Another rich source was discovered around Birmingham, Alabama.  Eventually centers of production were developed closer to the new sources of ore and coal in Cleveland; Detroit, Chicago, and Birmingham.

The petroleum industry also emerged in the late nineteenth century.  Many Americans had been aware for some time of the existence of petroleum reserves in western Pennsylvania where oil often seeped to the surface of streams and springs.  At first, however, no one was quite sure what it was or what to do with it.  In 1855, however, Pennsylvania businessman George H. Bissell sent a sample of oil to Professor Benjamin Silliman of Yale for analysis.  Silliman told him that the substance could be used for lighting purposes as an alternative to expensive whale oil.  Convinced now that oil had commercial possibilities, Bissell sent Edwin L. Drake to establish the first oil well near Titusville in western Pennsylvania.  Skeptics called the well “Drake's folly,” but demand for petroleum grew quickly enough to create an oil rush.  Promoters began to develop other fields in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia.  Strong competition kept prices low, increasing the attractiveness of oil as an alternative to other illuminants.  By the 1870s nearly 40 million barrels of petroleum had been produced, oil had advanced to fourth place among the nation's exports; and annual production was approaching 20 million barrels. 

The technological innovation that probably had the most revolutionary effect on industry and on the lives of the growing urban population was the introduction in the 1870s of electricity as a source of light and power.  Among the several men who pioneered this development were Charles F. Brush, who devised the arc lamp for street illumination, and Thomas A. Edison, who invented, among many other electrical devices, the incandescent lamp (or light bulb), which could be used for both street and home lighting.  Edison and others designed improved generators and built large power plants to furnish electricity to whole cities.  By the turn of the century, 2,774 power stations were in operation, and some 2 million electric lights were in use in the country.  Electric power was, by 1900, becoming commonplace in street railway systems, in the elevators of urban skyscrapers, and in factories.

New technologies and materials similarly transformed other industries.  The refrigerated freight car made possible the expansion of the great meatpacking organizations of Gustavus Swift, Philip Armour, and others.  New methods of canning foods and condensing milk helped establish the prepared-foods industry under the leadership of Gail Borden and others.  James Duke, utilizing a machine that could roll, paste, and cut tubes of tobacco into 100,000 cigarettes a day, formed the American Tobacco Company in 1890, making cigarettes the most popular form of tobacco consumption.  By the beginning of the twentieth century new technology was leading to even greater advances.  There were early experiments in communication by radio conducted by the Italian inventor Guglielmo Marconi in the 1890s.  There was also the beginning of the development of air travel with the famous flight by the Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, in 1903. 

Of more immediate importance was the development of the automobile.  In the 1870s designers in France, Germany, and Austria were already beginning to develop engines that could drive independently controlled vehicles.  They achieved early successes with an “internal combustion engine,” which used the expanding power of burning an oil byproduct, gasoline, to drive pistons.  With this new engine they created the first automobiles, which were essentially traditional carriages fitted with their own source of power, to replace the horse.  Meanwhile, in the United States, inventors such as Charles and Frank Duryea, Elwood Haynes, Ransom Olds, and Henry Ford were designing their own automobiles.  The Duryeas built and operated the first gasoline-driven motor vehicle in America in 1903.  Three years later, Ford produced the first of the famous cars that would bear his name.  In 1898 the first automobile advertisement appeared in Scientific American, under the headline: “Dispense With a Horse.”  By 1900 automobile companies were turning out more than 4,000 cars a year.  Within twenty years, when manufacturers such as Ford were finally able to develop mass production techniques such as the assembly line to bring the cost down, and American roads began to be improved to make extensive automobile traffic possible, the industry became the driving force of the economy.  As a result, the automobile was beginning to reshape American social and cultural life.  In 1895 there had been only four automobiles on the American highways.  By 1917 there were nearly 5 million.

The Urban Work Force

·        What were the two main sources of urban labor?  How did this contribute to industrialization?

·        How were the “new immigrants” different from earlier immigrants?  What factors led to tensions between the various ethnic groups?

 

Another major factor in the expansion of U.S. industry was the availability of abundant and inexpensive labor.  The dramatic expansion in the industrial work force, which was both a cause and a result of economic growth, arose out of a massive migration of labor into industrial cities.  As before the Civil War, this migration came from two separate sources.  The first source of urban labor was the continuing flow of rural Americans into factory towns and cities; people disillusioned with or bankrupted by life on the farm and eager for new economic and social opportunities.  As in Britain earlier, technological advancements in farming created a surplus of farm labor.  Whereas it had taken three hours to harvest a bushel of wheat by hand prior to the Civil War, Cyrus McCormick’s mechanical reaper made it possible to complete the same task in ten minutes.  John Deere’s development of the steel plow also made it possible to easily cultivate land that had been impossible or unprofitable before.  The second source was the great wave of immigration from abroad (primarily from Europe, but also from Asia, Canada, and other areas) in the decades following the Civil War, an influx that all but overshadowed the previous periods of immigration.  The 25 million immigrants who arrived in the United States between 1865 and 1915 were more than four times the number who had arrived in the fifty years before.  The greatest wave of new arrivals came after 1890, and by the end of the first decade of the new century, immigrants were entering America at the rate of more than one million per year.

Until 1880 most of the immigrants came from the nation's traditional sources: England, Ireland, and Northwestern Europe.  Skilled artisans (craftsmen) continued to emigrate from Great Britain to take advantage of the expanding opportunities in America.  Economic troubles in European industry in the 1880s also induced factory workers from Sweden, Germany, and England to move to the United States.  The declining agricultural economy of Northern Europe (and of Ireland, in particular) pressured still others to journey to America.  By the end of the century, however, the major sources of immigrants had shifted, with large numbers of Southern and Eastern Europeans (Italians, Poles, Russians, Greeks, Slavs, and others) pouring into the country and into the industrial work force.  On the West Coast, Chinese laborers were brought in to work for low wages building the railroads.  By 1880 one-tenth of California’s population was Chinese.

Americans of old stock, as well as ethnic groups who had arrived a decade or so before, often looked on these new immigrants with fear and hostility.  The strange customs, languages, and religions of the new arrivals elicited strong prejudice, and often violence.  In Wyoming, white miners massacred 28 Chinese miners in 1885.  In the Northeast, Catholics and Jews met faced strong religious prejudice from predominately Protestant old-stock Americans.  To the industrialists, however, immigration provided an abundant source of inexpensive labor.  Industries that had traditionally been dominated by one national group now began to replace them with members of others, who could be hired at lower wages than the earlier workers.  This only added to the tensions between the various ethnic groups.  Poles, Greeks, and French Canadians began to displace the British and Irish workers in the textile factories of New England.  Italians, Slavs, and Poles began to emerge as a major source of labor for the mining industry, which had traditionally been the province of native workers or Northern European immigrants.  Within industries, moreover, workers tended to cluster in particular occupations (and thus, often, at particular income levels) by ethnic group just as urban neighborhoods were often strictly segregated by country of origin.  The popular image of the “melting pot” of Americans of different ethnic backgrounds melding together into one common culture was more myth than reality as various ethnic groups isolated themselves in competition for the same jobs.  Ethnic tensions also made it difficult for workers to organize to demand greater rights as ethnic hostility often outweighed any sense of worker solidarity.

The Revolution in Business Practices

·        What is a corporation?

·        How did the development of railroads assist the growth of industry?

·        What were combinations?

·        How did Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller develop huge monopolies?

·        What is the difference between a horizontal monopoly and a vertical monopoly?

·        What is the difference between a trust and a holding company?

·        What were the positive and negative effects of the development of monopolies?

·        What contribution did Frederick Winslow Taylor make to the development of industry?

·        What business practice did Thomas Edison inspire?

·        What benefits were generated by Ford’s use of mass production in the automobile industry?

 

The principal agent of industrial development in the late nineteenth century was the continued expansion of the nation’s railroads.  Railroads promoted economic growth in many ways.  As the principal method of transportation, they made possible the expansion of genuinely national commerce by giving industrialists quick and relatively inexpensive access to distant markets and distant sources of raw materials.  Also, as the nation's largest businesses, the railroads created new forms of organization that served as models for other industries.  As America's biggest investors, they stimulated economic growth through their own enormous expenditures on construction and equipment.

Even before the Civil War, railroads had been the most important single economic interest in the United States.  Their importance grew still further in the years that followed the war.  Every decade the total railroad trackage increased dramatically.  Along with the extension of lines came improvements in technology that made railroad travel safer and more efficient—steel rails, heavier locomotives and cars, uniform track gauge, wider roadbeds, and perhaps most important, new braking systems (first introduced by George Westinghouse) that reduced the danger of derailments and pileups.  Subsidies (grants of money) and land grants by the federal government to support the transcontinental lines and by state and local governments to encourage secondary routes were vital to these vast undertakings, which required far more capital (money) than private entrepreneurs could raise by themselves.  Between 1850 and 1857 the railroads received 25 million acres of public land, free of charge, and millions of dollars in loans.

Equally important was the emergence of great railroad corporations, the first large economic combinations that brought a vast proportion of the nation's rails under the control of a very few men.  Among the earliest such combinations was the vast New York Central Empire of Cornelius Vanderbilt (a former steamship owner widely known as “the Commodore”).  Vanderbilt and other railroad tycoons, among them James J. Hill, Jay Gould, and Leland Stanford, became symbols to much of the nation of great economic power concentrated in a few single individuals.  But railroad development was less significant for the individual barons it created than for its contribution to the growth of a new business institution—the modern corporation.

There had been “corporations” in America since colonial times.  The term was then used to describe organizations chartered by governments and charged with running such public facilities as bridges, roads, and banks but the corporation in the modern sense of the word emerged as a major economic force only after the Civil War.  By then railroad tycoons and other industrialists were realizing that many of the great ventures they envisioned could not be financed by any single person, no matter how wealthy, nor even by any single group of partners.  Under the laws of incorporation passed in many states in the 1830s and 1840s business organizations could raise money by selling stock (shares of ownership) to members of the public.  This was not a totally new practice.  The first great industrial enterprise in the country, Lowell’s Boston Manufacturing Company, had been incorporated in 1813.  It raised a staggering sum of $400,000 and returned dividends (a share of the profits) of 104.5% to its investors in its first ten years of operation.  In the decades after the Civil War, one industry after another adopted this practice of financing its undertakings.  More importantly, affluent (wealthy) Americans began to consider the purchase of stock to be a good investment, even if they were not themselves personally involved in the business whose stock they were purchasing.  Investors hoped to receive dividends if the business was profitable and capital gains if the value of their stock increased.  The phenomenon of people investing in businesses with which they had no direct connection was almost entirely new.[8]  What made the practice appealing was that investors had only “limited liability,” that is investors risked only the amount of their investments.  They were not liable for any debts the corporation might accumulate beyond that point.  Therefore if a company went bankrupt, individuals could not lose more than they had invested.  Thus, with the creation of corporations, it was now possible for entrepreneurs to gather vast sums of capital and undertake great projects.

The new type of corporation quickly spread beyond the railroad industry to other areas of the economy.  In steel, the central figure was Andrew Carnegie, a Scottish immigrant who had worked his way up in the railroad industry.  In 1873 he opened his own steelworks in Pittsburgh; and in the following decades expanded his company to a place of dominance in the industry.  His methods were much like those of other rising industrial titans (giants).  He capitalized on the advantages of economy of scale, the principle that the unit cost to produce an item drops with the more items produced.  A larger industry such as Carnegie’s had many advantages.  From the railroads, who could not afford to lose his business, he obtained rebates (return of part of the price) on his shipments so that he could cut his costs and hence his prices.  He bought out rival concerns that could not compete with him.  He set up, in collaboration with his able associate Henry Clay Frick, a carefully integrated system that enabled him to control the processing of steel from mine to market.  His company bought up coalmines and leased part of the Mesabi Range, operated a fleet of ore ships on the Great Lakes, and acquired railroads.  Carnegie financed his undertakings not only out of his own profits but also out of the sale of stock.  Then, in 1901, he sold out to the banker J. Pierpont Morgan, who merged the Carnegie interests with others to create the giant United States Steel Corporation, a $1.4 billion enterprise that controlled almost two-thirds of the nation's steel production.

Businessmen such as Carnegie created huge monopolies (businesses that dominated their industry) through two primary methods.  The first was “horizontal integration,” the combining of a number of firms engaged in the same business into a single corporation.  The consolidation of many different railroad lines into one company was an example of the formation of this type of monopoly.  The second method, which became prevalent in the 1890s, was “vertical integration,” the taking over of the businesses on which a company relied for its primary function.  Carnegie Steel, which came to not only control steel mills, but also mines, railroads, and other enterprises, was an example of a vertical monopoly.

It was not simply the domination over their smaller competitors that characterized the new corporations; it was also a new approach to management.  Large, national business enterprises needed vastly different management structures than the limited, local companies of the past.  As a result, corporate leaders introduced a set of managerial techniques that relied on the division of responsibilities, a carefully designed hierarchy of control, modern cost-accounting procedures, and perhaps above all a new breed of business executive: the “middle manager,” who formed a layer of command between workers and owners.  Stockholders elected a Board of Directors to oversee the operation of the business, which was entrusted to a Chief Executive Officer (CEO).  Depending on the size of the business, various levels of upper and middle management oversaw the labor force.  Beginning in the railroad corporations, these new management techniques moved quickly into virtually every area of large-scale industry.  Here again, advancements in technology played a key role.  The modern corporate structure would have been impossible without telephones, typewriters, adding machines, and cash registers.

The most celebrated corporate empire of the late nineteenth century was Standard Oil.  The greatest monopoly builder of the time, John D. Rockefeller, pieced it together by using both vertical and horizontal methods.  Beginning at the age of nineteen, when he became a partner in a Cleveland business that earned great profits during the Civil War, Rockefeller displayed remarkable business talents.  Farsighted and skilled at organization, he decided that his own economic future lay with the oil industry.  Shortly after the Civil War he launched a refining company in Cleveland, Ohio.  From the beginning, he sought to eliminate his competition, especially the many small-scale companies that he believed were ruining the petroleum industry by driving down prices through intense competition.  Through ruthless cost cutting—made possible by economy of scale—and manipulation of the railroads, he proceeded methodically to buy out other refineries.  In 1870 he formed the Standard Oil Company of Ohio, which in a few years acquired twenty of the twenty-five refineries in Cleveland, as well as plants in Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, New York, and Baltimore.

Initially Rockefeller expanded only horizontally but soon he began expanding vertically as well.  He built his own barrel factories, terminal warehouses, and a network of pipelines that gave him control over most of the facilities for transporting petroleum.  Standard Oil also owned its own freight cars and developed its own marketing organization, thus avoiding commissions (payments for service) to middlemen.  By the 1880s Rockefeller had established such dominance within the petroleum industry that he became the leading symbol of monopolistic practices.

Rockefeller and other industrialists saw the creation of monopolies as a way to cope with what many believed was the greatest curse of the modern economy—cutthroat competition.  Businessmen insisted that they believed fervently in free enterprise and a competitive marketplace, but such beliefs often lasted only until they themselves were exposed to competition.[9]  Then they realized that the existence of too many competing firms in a single industry could spell instability and ruin for all, and that a successful enterprise was one that could eliminate or absorb its competitors.  The most successful technique for eliminating this competition was the creation of the trust, pioneered by Standard Oil in the early 1880s.  Over time the word “trust” became a synonym for any large monopoly.  A trust was in fact a particular kind of organization, one that soon became a common vehicle for consolidating railroads and other industries as well.  Under a trust agreement, stockholders in individual corporations transferred their stocks to a small group of trustees (in the case of the Standard Oil Trust, to men chosen and dominated by Rockefeller) in exchange for shares in the trust itself.  Owners of trust certificates often had no direct control over the decisions of the trustees; they simply received a share of the profits of the combination.  Thus while John D. Rockefeller officially owned only a few refinery companies, he managed through the mechanism of the trust to extend his reach over a vast range of enterprises.  An even greater master of the trust was J. P. Morgan.  In theory Morgan was simply a bank president; in reality he dominated scores of industrial organizations.

Another form of consolidation, closely related to the trust, began to emerge in the 1890s.  In 1889 the state of New Jersey, followed later by many other states, changed its laws of incorporation to permit companies to buy up other companies.  This made the cumbersome awkward vehicle of the trust unnecessary and permitted actual mergers of companies.  Rockefeller quickly relocated Standard Oil to New Jersey and created what became known as a holding company, a central corporate body that would formally buy up the stock of various members of the Standard Oil trust and establish direct ownership of each company in the trust.  Many other corporations followed suit.  As a result, by the end of the nineteenth century 1% of the corporations in America were able to control more than 33% of the manufacturing.  A congressional investigation disclosed in 1913 that Rockefeller and Morgan between them controlled companies valued at more than $22 billion.  What was emerging, in other words, was a system of economic organization that lodged enormous power in the hands of very few men, the great bankers of New York and industrial titans such as Rockefeller (who himself gained control of a major bank).

Whether or not the ruthless concentration of economic power in huge monopolies such as Standard Oil and U.S. Steel was the only way (or the best way) to promote industrial expansion became a major source of debate in America in the late nineteenth century and beyond.  It is, however, clear that the industrial giants of the era were responsible for substantial economic growth and forever changing the face of American business.

Just as the development of huge corporations forced a change in techniques of business management, changes were also made to increase the efficiency of factory work.  Central to the growth of many industries were advances in the science of production.  Convinced that a modern economy required modernization of the manufacturing process, industrialists by the turn of the century were employing new principles of “scientific management,” or ways to manage human labor to increase its efficiency.  The leading force behind this new science was Frederick Winslow Taylor.  Taylor observed every minute detail of the manufacturing process and suggested ways to save time and energy, realizing that, in a mass production business, even the smallest savings would be duplicated millions of times in the course of a single day.  Taylor urged employers to reorganize the production process by subdividing tasks into specialties for each worker.  This would be a way to speed up production; it would also make workers more interchangeable and thus diminish a manager's dependence on any particular employee.  If properly managed, he argued, fewer and fewer workers could perform simple tasks at much greater speed, greatly increasing productive efficiency.

Manufacturers also began placing greater emphasis on industrial research to improve their products or develop new ones.  In part because of the phenomenal success of Thomas Edison's famous industrial laboratory in Menlo Park, New Jersey, dozens of corporations began establishing laboratories of their own.  By 1913 Bell Telephone, Du Pont, General Electric, Eastman Kodak, and several other companies were budgeting hundreds of thousands of dollars each year for research by their own engineers and scientists.

Out of all the new methods and machines emerged the greatest triumph of production technology: mass production and, above all, the moving assembly line, which Henry Ford introduced in his automobile plants in 1914.  This revolutionary technique cut the time for assembling an automobile chassis from twelve and a half to one and a half hours.  It also enabled Ford to raise the wages and reduce the hours of his workers while cutting the base price of his Model T from $950 to $290.  Ford’s accomplishment served as an example for many other industries.

Progress for Many

·        In what ways did the lives of many Americans benefit from industrialization?

·        How did industrialization change the buying habits of most Americans?

 

The rise of American industry could not have occurred without the growth of markets for the goods being produced.  Although some Americans could not afford to buy the products of their labor, a mass market for industrial goods did emerge.  Much of it consisted of members of the middle class, whose own increasing wealth allowed them to purchase more goods than they once had.  Much of the growth of sales consisted of people who became consumers less because they were making more money than because mass production and mass distribution were making consumer goods less expensive.

Incomes did rise in the industrial era, although at highly uneven rates.  The most conspicuous (obvious, easy to see) result of the new economy was the creation of vast fortunes; but perhaps the most important result for society as a whole was the growth and increasing prosperity of the middle class.  The salaries of clerks, accountants, supervisors, and other white-collar workers rose by an average of a third between 1890 and 1910 and in some parts of the middle class much higher.  Doctors, lawyers, and other professionals, for example, experienced a particularly dramatic increase in both the prestige and the profitability of their professions.  Working-class incomes for factory workers rose too in these years, although from a much lower base and at a far less rapid pace.  Iron and steelworkers, for example, saw their hourly wages increase by a third between 1890 and 1910.  Industries with large female workforces, shoes, textiles, and paper saw more modest increases, as did almost all industries in the South.  Family incomes for working-class people increased, too, because women and children so often worked to supplement the husband and father's earnings, or because families took in boarders or did laundry for the neighborhood.

Far more important than rising incomes, however, was the development of affordable products and the creation of new merchandising techniques, which made many consumer goods available to a mass market for the first time.  A good example of such changes was the emergence of ready-made clothing as the basis of the American wardrobe.  In the early nineteenth century most Americans had made their own clothing, usually from cloth they bought from merchants or from fabrics they spun and wove themselves.  The invention of the sewing machine and the spur that the Civil War (with its demand for uniforms) gave to the manufacture of clothing created an enormous industry devoted to producing ready-made garments.  By the end of the century, virtually all Americans bought their clothing from stores; and partly as a result, much larger numbers of people were becoming concerned with questions of style.  Interest in women's fashion, for example, had once been a luxury reserved for the relatively affluent.  Now middle-class and even working-class women could strive to develop a distinctive style of dress.

Another example was the way Americans bought and prepared food.  The development and mass production of tin cans in the 1880s created a large new industry devoted to packaging and selling canned food and condensed milk.  Refrigerated railroad cars were making it possible for meats, vegetables, dairy products, and other foodstuffs to be transported over long distances without spoiling.  The growth of artificially frozen ice made possible the proliferation of iceboxes in homes that in the past had not been able to afford them.  For most Americans, these changes meant improved diets, better health, and ultimately longer lives.  As a result, life expectancy rose six years in the first two decades of the twentieth century.

Changes in marketing also served to alter the way Americans purchased products.  Small local stores began to face competition from national “chain stores.”  The Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company (A & P) began to establish a national network of grocery stores beginning in the 1870s.  F. W. Woolworth's created a chain of dry goods stores.  Sears Roebuck and Montgomery Ward established a large market for their mail-order merchandise by distributing enormous catalogues from which even people in remote rural areas could order new products.  In larger cities, the emergence of the great department stores helped to transform buying habits and to turn shopping into a more fascinating and glamorous activity.  Marshall Field in Chicago created one of the first American department stores, a place deliberately designed to create a sense of wonder and excitement.  Similar department stores such as Macy's and Abraham and Straus emerged in New York, Brooklyn, Boston, Philadelphia, and other cities.

For many Americans the industrial revolution eventually brought access to more abundant and less expensive products, improving their lives greatly.  But for other Americans, most notably farmers and the urban poor, the dramatic social changes brought only hardship and misery.  This gap between advancing and declining segments of society would produce decades of social and political turmoil.  Beginning in the 1880s calls for reform of the political system, in order to adjust to the rapidly changing economic and social conditions, began to be heard.  Modern industrial development created great wealth for some and significant progress for others.  It was, however, the problems created by this development that would alter the political system and further change American society.[10]

 

Jeffrey T. Stroebel, The Sycamore School, 1995.  Revised 2002.



[1]A century is a hundred-year period of time.  The first century began in the year 1 and ended in the year 100.  The eighteenth century began in 1701 and ended in 1800.

[2] It has been estimated that 80% of the rural population was eventually displaced from the land.

[3]Most of the information for the industrial development of Britain is taken from chapter six “Credit Where It’s Due” of James Burke’s The Day the Universe Changed (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1980), pp. 163-193.

[4]Daniel J. Boorstin, ed. An American Primer (New York: Mentor, 1966), pp. 196-209.

[5]Steven Lubar, Engines of Change (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution, 1986), p. 30.

[6]A patent gives an inventor the exclusive right to manufacture his/her invention and prevents competitors from copying it.

[7]The canal linked Albany, New York and Lake Erie.  Goods could now be shipped up the Hudson River from New York, across the canal, and into the Great Lakes.

[8]Lowell’s investors had been closely involved in the management of the company.

[9]The titans of industry also professed a fierce sense of national patriotism, although an amazing number chose to avoid military service in the Civil War.  J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, Jay Gould, and Philip Armour all purchased substitutes (as was legal) for $300 to avoid service in the army.

[10] Some of the information on the development of American industry is adapted from Compton’s Encyclopedia of American History, 1994 ed., Compton’s NewMedia, Inc.