{I'.i:}illj*afeil«t LIBRARY OF THE NEW YORK STATE COLLEGE OF HOME ECONOMICS CORNELL UNIVERSITY ITHACA, NEW YORK ^sJP^ Cornell University Library HC 105.T7 Household manufactures in the Unite^^^^ 3 1924 013 901 727 The original of tliis book is in tlie Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924013901727 HOUSEHOLD MANUFACTURES I 640-1 860 THE UNIVEBSITY OF CHICAGO PBEBS CHICAGO, ILLINOIS Bgents THE BAKER & TAYLOR COMPANY HEW TOBK THE CtnmiNaHAU, CURTISS & WELCH COMPANY lOS AS0ELE3 THE CAMBRIDGE VNITEBSITT PRESS LONDON AND SDIHBDBOH THE UARVZEN-EABUSHIEI-EAISHA TOKYO, OSAKA, KTOTO, EDKDOKA, SBNDAI THE MISSION BOOK COMPANY SBAKeBAI Household Manufactures in the United States I 640-1 860 A Study in Industrial History By ROLLA MILTON TRYON Assistant Professor of the Teaching of History University of Chicago THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 5 S Copyright 1917 By The UsivEasiTY or Chicago v' All Rights Reserved Published May igi7 Composed and Printed By The University oi Chicago Press Chicaeo. lUlnois, U.S.A. PREFACE In any historical study the closer one gets to the every- day life of the common people the better basis one has for understanding that people's history. Few historical sub- jects offer better opportunities to get very near the actual life of the common people than the one treated in the following pages. In order to determine the extent to which household manufacturing was carried on in the United States prior to i860, the phases and processes relative to the industry, and the products resulting therefrom, it was necessary for the writer to go right into the homes of the people engaged in such manufacturing. Such, of course, was historically but not actually possible. Historically speaking, the writer was able to see the system of family manufacturing in operation through the accounts of those persons who both actually saw and were a part of it and were for this reason in a position to record facts, describe conditions, and estimate amounts relative to the system. Because of the author's desire to get as near to the daily life of the people as possible, much use has been made of contemporary accounts, personal recollections, local his- tories, and census returns. All these have been used with a full realization of their character and of the danger involved in using them solely as a basis for final historical conclusions. Nevertheless, when a census ofl&cial went into the home and secured data from first-hand sources, when the traveler did likewise and described what he saw, and when a vi Preface responsible individual in his later years wrote in consider- able detail of his early life, it does not seem that any better sources could be found for a subject like the one herein discussed, even though one admits that they are subject to all sorts of human frailties. It is certainly true that no adequate history of household manufactures in the United States prior to i860 could be written without a large use of such materials. It is the writer's belief that a history of any special phase of the life of a people, treating that phase in more or less isolation from the various other phases of that people's life, would be of no great value. Because of this belief an attempt has been made throughout the discussion to relate household manufactures to the people's social, political, and general industrial life. While the reader will not get many details relative to England's commercial policy toward the colonies, the handicraft and factory systems, transporta- tion, commerce, and the like, yet at the same time he will throughout the book be conscious of the existence of these factors and their relation to the family system of manu- facturing. Such a treatment has occasionally forced the discussion somewhat away from the main topic, but in the end it has added facts and impressions essential to the paramount issue. Since this special care has been taken to portray the system of household manufacturing as it existed up to i860 in its relation to the industrial life and prosperity of the nation as a whole, the book may prove a valuable adjunct to history courses in elementary, high, and normal schools and colleges, and to certain courses in the depart- Preface vii ment of home economics and household arts wherever they are given. The book contains material to satisfy, partially at least, the present-day demand for industrial- history material in history courses. It also furnishes the domestic-science and household-arts teachers a historical background for their courses by giving an account of certain phases of their work as it was done in the home before the school ever thought of doing it. It is with deep gratitude that the writer acknowledges his indebtedness to Professors A. C. McLaughlin, W. E. Dodd, and M. W. Jernegan, all of the University of Chicago, for their valuable assistance throughout the writing of this account. To Professor Jernegan he is especially indebted for his suggestions as to form and content of the discussion, for his careful reading and keen criticisms of the manu- script, and for his helpful guidance in seeking and evalu- ating sources. It was upon Professor Dodd's suggestion that the work was begun; his counsel and advice were always cheerfully given whenever sought; he also read the manuscript and made valuable suggestions. Professor McLaughlin gave serviceable aid in the general plan and organization of the field and in securing access to valuable source material. R. M. T. Chicago, III. December, 1916 TABLE OF CONTENTS SAPTEK PAGE I. Introductory . . ... i Scope of the Discussion Importance of the Subject Connections with Present-Day Problems Plan of Treatment II. Factors Affecting Household Manufactures in the Colonies . . ... 13 England's Colonial Policy and Household Manufac- tures The Colonies' Policy of Encouragement Economic and Political Conditions III. The Status of Household Manufactures in the Colonies . . .... 61 Seventeenth-Century Beginnings Progress after 1700 New Influences and Tendencies IV. A Quarter-Century of Developments, 1784-1809 123 A Sudden Decline and a Quick Recovery A Cross-Section View about 1790 Household Manufactures the Dominant Factor in the Struggle for Industrial Independence V. A Year's Output of the Family Factory . . 164 The Retxu:ns of the Marshals in the Autimin of 1810 Household Manufactures in Every State and Territory Household Textile Manufactures in Every County Slave Population and Household Manufactures X Table of Contents VI. The Products of the Family Factory ... 188 Wearing Apparel and Household Textile Supplies Household Implements, Utensils, Furniture, Necessities, and Comforts Farming Implements, Building Materials, and General Supplies VII. The Transition from Family- to Shop- and Factory- Made Goods 242 Stages in and Phases of the Transition Progress of the Transition to 1810 The Transfer Completed in Whole or in Part, 1810-30 VIII. The Passing of the Family Factory .... 303 What Happened in One State (New York) What Happened in the Country as a Whole Generalizations and Conclusions Bibuography 377 Index 401 LIST OF TABLES PAGE I. Value of Imports from Great Britain, Christmas 1767-69 ... .56 II. Value of Woolen Goods of All Sorts Exported from England to the Colonies, 1772-75 57 III. Official Value of the Exports and Imports of the Colonies to and from Great Britain, Christmas, 1773, to Christmas, 1776 . . 58 IV. Imports from Great Britain, Christmas, 1776, to Christmas, 1783 . .... 59 V. Household Manufactures in Providence, Rhode Island, as Exhibited by Raw Materials, Implements, and Finished Products Listed in Inventories . . .81 VI. Clothing Worn by Runaway Servants and Slaves in New Jersey, 1704-79 . ... 91 VII. Quantity and Value of Cloth and Stockings Made by Twenty Families in King William County, Virginia, from January i, 1790, to January i, 1791 . . 139 VIII. Account of Manufactures in Survey No. 2 by Twenty Families from the Richest and the Poorest in the Period from January 1 to December 31, 1790 ... 140 IX. Distribution by Counties of Premiums Awarded in New York State imder the Acts of April 8, 1808, April 5, 1810, and Jime 19, 181 2 ... . . . 150 X. General Summary of Premiums Awarded by the Society for the Promotion of Useful Arts in New York and by the County Judges, imder the Acts of 1808, 1810, and 1812 .... 152 xii List of Tables XI. The Kinds, Total Yards, Total and Per Capita Values of Household Manufactures in Every State and Territory of the United States for the Year Ending in the Autumn of 1810 166 XII. The Kinds, Total Yards, Total and Per Capita Values of Household Textile Manufactures in Every State, Ter- ritory, and County in the United States for the Year Ending in the Autumn of 1810 . 169 XIII. Slave Population and Household Textile Manufactures in 1810 185 XIV. Diminution of Manufactures in the City and County of Philadelphia, 1814-19 282 XV. One Year's Output of Household Textile Manufactures in New York, 1820-21 . . 289 XVI. Household Textile Manufactures in New York in 1825, 183s, 184s, and i8ss • • 304 XVII. Total and Per Capita Values by States and Territories of Household Manufactures in the United States in 1840, 1850, and i860 308 XVIII. Total and Per Capita Values by Counties of Household Manufactiures in the United States in 1840, 1850, and i860 312 XIX. Per Capita Value for the Year i860 of Household Manufactures in Counties Not Included in Table xvni 370 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTORY The nature of the subject treated in the following pages makes it necessary to state rather specifically at the outset what it does and does not include. Stated positively, the term "household manufactures" as used in this discussion comprises all those articles now made almost wholly in shop or factory which were formerly made in the home and on the plantation by members of the family or plantation household from raw material produced largely on the farm where the manufacturing was done. Negatively expressed, the subject does not include: (i) goods wrought for sale, the manufacture of which was the only or principal occupa- tion of those concerned and employed in making them; (2) things made in the home as a supplement to factory operations; (3) products of the home factory from mate- rials furnished from sources other than the shop or the factory; (4) articles made on the plantation primarily for sale; (5) commodities such as bread, butter, jellies, etc., which are yet common productions of farm homes, even though they are made in large quantities in fac- tories. Some concrete examples will clarify these elimi- nations. Goods wrought for sale by those whose chief or only business was their manufacture embrace the products of the handicraft system. While the home occasionally 2 Household Manufactures in the United States made wares for sale, yet at the same time the business of making them was but an adjunct to the ordinary routine of farm life, such goods being exchanged for those that the home produced with considerable difiSiculty, or not at all. To draw a hard-and-fast line of demarkation between the handicraft and household systems of manufacture has not been possible at all times. In many cases some of the processes connected with the manufacture of certain articles were performed in the home and others in the shop or mill. In the manufacture of woolen cloth the carding, fulling, dyeing, shearing, and pressing were often performed in an establishment and only the spinning and weaving were done in the home, either by members of the family or by itinerant spinners and weavers. In all cases where the manufactured articles resulted from the combined efforts of the family and the foregoing agencies they have been denominated household manufactures. Strictly shop-made goods have been eliminated when at all possible, because the handicraft system of manufacturing as it once existed in this country is worthy of a treatment apart from other systems. Articles made in the home merely as a supplement to factory or shop operations have been excluded in order to eliminate all the so-called sweatshop-made goods. Such an elimination includes all sorts of manufacturing in the home where the material was furnished by the factory or shop, and where the worker had nothing but his labor invested. For example, as early as 1784, after the inven- tion of a machine for cutting wire teeth for wool cards and one for piercing leather backs, the women and children Introductory 3 found a new employment at home, setting teeth in the backs, an operation in the manufacture of wool cards that was not done in the factory until fifteen years later.' Another case in point is the garment-making industry as it existed before the sewing-machine came into common use. A few decades prior to 1850 large quantities of gar- ments were cut out by the dealers in New York, Boston, and Philadelphia and sent to the country towns, where the daughters and wives of the farmers and sailors made them in their own homes.^ When possible, all such home opera- tions have been eliminated, because the subject under consideration is not at all concerned with goods produced by sweatshop labor. Another limitation excludes articles made in the homes from materials other than those furnished by shop or fac- tory and at the same time not produced upon the farm or plantation where they were manufactured. Chief among such exclusions are the poplar and palm-leaf hats, made in large quantities in many New England homes for some years after 1800. The material for making these hats was kept largely by traders or storekeepers, the women and girls securing it from them and receiving a certain sum for each hat made.' This home industry might be considered an important step in the transition from home- to factory- made goods in New England, since the women could buy the latter with the income from their hat-making, thus ' Earle, Borne Life in Colonial Days, p. 205. ' Abbott, Women in Industry, p. 220. 3 Chase, Hist, of Old Chester, N.H., p. 434; Norton, Hist, of Fitzwilliam, N.H., p. 414. 4 Household Manufactures in the United States relieving them of the arduous labor connected with carding, spinning, bleaching, weaving, and dyeing/ Plantation manufacturing has not been included when it was chiefly carried on for profit rather than to supply the plantation needs. For example. Colonel Scarburgh, of Northampton County, Virginia, as early as 1652 had a small malt-house and a shoe factory in which nine shoe- makers were employed, both of which were run for profit.'^ While Washington did weaving for the neighbors in his establishment, yet he did not maintain it primarily for this purpose. Plantation manufacturing means, through- out the discussion, that done mainly to supply the planta- tion necessities and not that done for sale. Since the discussion is concerned solely with those articles once made in the home or on the plantation, but now universally made in factories, it has been thought best to eliminate all articles quite generally made at the present time by the wives and daughters of the farmers. Such articles are included in the last elimination mentioned above. While the making of these articles may in time pass to the factory, just as many others once made in the home have done, yet such is not the case at present, hence a reason for their exclusion. The importance of household manufactures in the his- tory of this country to about 1830 can hardly be realized by one who has not given the subject special consideration. ' Nail-making has not been eliminated. While the farmer secured the rods from the nearest store, yet at the same time he consumed much of the product. For this reason it has been included. ' Wise, The Eastern Shore of Va. in the 17th Cent., p. 302. Introductory S The almost economic independence of naany homes and communities was a great asset to the people of the Revolu- tionary days in their struggle for political liberty. War and blockade only drove them back to more primitive con- ditions and established an industrial independence of both foreign and domestic markets. After seven years of costly warfare, England finally realized the difficulty of conquering colonists who could within their homes manu- facture the necessities that her blockade aimed to keep out. The service rendered by this family industry during the Revolutionary War is the more significant when con- trasted with what the South attempted through it during the Civil War. In spite of its reversion to the primitive ways of supplying necessities, the Confederacy was unable to escape what the federal blockade finally brought. Aside from the part played by the system of household manufactures during the Revolutionary days in securing and maintaining an industrial independence, it was of very great moment to the nation at large in its early his- tory as a supplement to agriculture — of necessity a pre- vailing industry in a new country. Without a European market, or in fact any market at all, agricultural profits were always very small. This was especially true on the frontier and in all sections devoid of transportation facil- ities, because there were so many farmers, hence a small number depending on others for their agricultural products. The fertility of the soil also gave a liberal return for the work involved. Now, since there was no market for the labor of the field, the farmer had to exchange his leisure hours for a supply of clothing and other necessities which he 6 Household Manufactures in the United States could have purchased if he had had a market for his staples. Until this market came his dependence upon the household factory was ahnost absolute. It is certainly no exaggera- tion to say that civilization could not have been maintained in sections of the New England and middle states during the colonial period, and on the frontier everywhere for several years after the appearance of the first settlement, without the system of household manufactures. The social life of many communities also centered in the system of family manufactures. It was in the social gatherings connected with spinning, carding, and fulling that the people, young and old, found wholesome enjoy- ment. The spinning, carding, and fulling bees, the spinning societies and contests, all gave the people op- portunities to satisfy their social instincts and desires. Furthermore, the socializing effect, upon both the indi- vidual and the community, of the give-and-take necessary to support the system was also very great. Everyone had to do his part in the support of the family or neighbor- hood. Since most of the work was done in the home or on the farm, the system produced a home-bred, home-living, and a home-loving people — a people who found both their employment and their pleasure in their own or their near neighbor's home. While the discussion deals primarily with the history of household manufactures in the United States prior to i860, and makes no special attempt to point out the physi- cal, educational, and moral influences of the system on the people engaged in it, yet these influences should not be wholly overlooked, in spite of the fact that their intangible- Introdtictory 7 ness makes it almost impossible to evaluate and treat them historically. After realizing the diligence, industry, per- severance, economy, skill, and a number of other virtues that were required to maintain the system, one is in a position to approximate its physical, educational, and moral effects. As an aid in such an approximation, we have the testimony of certain individuals who really knew the system first-hand. In speaking of the general influence of domestic chores on the growing boy, Drake remarked: "When I look back upon the useful arts which mother and I were accustomed to practice, I am almost surprised at their number, and although I did not then regard them as any- thing but incidents of poverty and ignorance, I now view them as knowledge, as elements of mental growth.'" G. Stanley Hall on one occasion spoke as follows concern- ing the effects of the old New England life: "Despite certain evils this life [old New England] at its best appears to me to have constituted the best educational environ- ment for boys at a certain stage of their development ever realized in history, combining physical, industrial, techni- cal, with civil and religious elements in a wise proportion and pedagogic objectivity."^ On the moral influence, Niles, in 1821, commented as follows:^ Household industry cannot be broken down even by the ever- watchful influence of Great Britain, nor be bribed to prostration by her conspired manufactures, if once more fully established in the United States; for we have learned wisdom too dearly through " Pioneer Life in Ky., p. 99. For a longer quotation on the same sub- ject see ihid., p. 109. ^ " Boy Life in a Massachusetts Town," Proc. Am. Ant. Sac, N.S., VII, 107!. 8 Household Manufactures in the United States suffering, to be led astray again. It is based on virtue — cheerfulness is its companion, happiness is its fruit, and independence is its result. Women thus reared will not give suck to a breed of slaves: but teach their offsprings a knowledge of their own powers, having furnished them strength to maintain their rights.' Similar testimony is on record as to the effects of the system on the health, constitution, and habits of the women. In commenting, in 1848, on the domestic habits of New England women, an elderly lady of Montpelier, Vermont, said that she was firmly convinced that among the changes and revolutions in domestic habits and customs in modern times, so far as the welfare of her own sex was concerned, the change most to be regretted was the one which led to the disuse of the old-fashioned family spinning-wheel. It was her opinion that the movement necessary in drawing out and running up the thread which required a constant march backward and forward, while the arms were alter- nately lifted in the operation, and also that of turning, brought all the muscles into play, and made just the exer- cise necessary for the development of the human system.' It is through the foregoing phases that the historical treatment of household manufactures in the United States is connected with present-day conditions. The manual- training, domestic-science, and household-arts courses in our current educational programs for both the elementary and the secondary schools are attempting to do what was " Register, XXI, 35. ' Cited by Thompson, Hist, of Montpelier, Vt., p. 76. Thompson, who wrote in i860, felt that it would be much better for the health, constitu- tion, and habits of the females if they were compelled to resort to the old way of clothing themselves and their families (ibid., p. 75). Introdtictory g done in the eighteenth and part of the nineteenth century in the homes. The social pressure that operated in placing these subjects in the schools during the last quarter of the nineteenth century was largely an expression of the feeling that much valuable training had been lost through the decay of the household system of manufacturing — a system that taught the girl by the time she was twenty to spin, weave, sew, embroider, knit, darn, crochet, patch, do laundry work well, prepare wholesome meals, make butter, cheese, and candles, and perform other duties connected with good housekeeping; a system that taught the boy to employ the spare moments of his farm life in the manu- facture from wood of such farm implements as plows, harrows, sleds, wagons, carts, shovels, flails, swingling knives, handles for spades, axes, hoes, and pitchforks, as well as various aids to domestic comfort, such as brooms, baskets, wooden bowls and bread troughs, butter-paddles, cheese-hoops, and other kitchen and table utensils; and, finally, a system that engendered such virtues as cheerful- ness, happiness, frugality, independence, diligence, perse- verance, skill, and self-reliance. It was largely the training that this system gave that the advocates of manual train- ing, domestic science, and household arts called upon the school to give as soon as it was discovered what had been lost in the decay of the system of household manufacturing. School authorities began to heed this call during the last quarter of the nineteenth century, and had by the end of the first decade of the twentieth quite generally introduced such subjects into the school. Their mere introduction by no means solved the problem. Their content, value, and lo Household Manufactures in the United States adimnistration remain a problem with many people. It is the hope of the writer that the following historical discussion of the family factory, in which such subjects were formerly so well taught, will furnish a backgroxmd for a better under- standing of present-day conditions and tendencies along these important educational lines. A few words regarding the general plan of treating the subject seem desirable before this brief introduction is closed. A combination of the chronological and topical methods has been employed. The colonial period has been covered four times, twice rather intensively and chrono- logically and twice less intensively and with little regard to chronology. Each of the four times the field has been covered with a very definite aim in view: the first, to determine and elucidate the various factors affecting house- hold manufactures; the second, to connect these factors with real situations; the third, to consider the multifarious products of the family factory; and the fourth, to find evidences of the transfer from family- to shop- and factory- made goods. The period from 1783 to 1810 has been treated chronologically with a view to showing influencing factors and amounts made, and topically for the purposes mentioned in three and four above. After 1810 the dis- cussion has largely to do with the transition from home- to factory-made goods, and adapts itself admirably to a straightforward chronological treatment. Continually to connect the subject with the general economic and political history of the nation, and to portray it as one of the domi- nant elements in the industrial life of this country for nearly two centuries, and for a time the one great factor in secur- Introductory 1 1 ing and sustaining an almost economic independence from foreign nations, and to place before the reader, in as con- crete a form as the data at hand warrant, the territorial extent, amount, and products of such manufactures, have been the controlling aims throughout the discussion. Because the system of household manufactures so thoroughly dovetailed itself into the contemporaneous handicraft, shop, and small-factory systems, and because in one section of the country one system predominated, while in another section a different system was in force, generalizations for any large section of the country at a specific time have been practically impossible. While the older towns and communities were in the shop stage, the new ones on the frontier were still making almost every- thing in the home. It should be said, however, that the stages in the evolution from home- to shop-, to small- factory-, to large-factory-made goods became briefer and briefer on the arrival of the steamboat, the canal, and the railroad. In time the first stage dropped out altogether. As soon as manufactured goods could be supplied from the sale or barter of the products of the farm, the home gave up its system of manufacturing, which had been largely carried on more through necessity than desire. Generally speaking, by i860 the factory, through the aid of improved means of transportation, was able to supply the needs of the people for manufactured commodities. For this reason the discussion closes with this date. While it is true that the South during the Civil War reverted to some extent to the primitive system, and that it existed in certain out-of-the-way places throughout the nineteenth century 12 Household Manufactures in the United States and even into the twentieth, yet it is also true that by i860 it had passed out of the life of the nation at large as a factor in its economic development and industrial prosperity/ ' On near present-day conditions in certain sections of the country, see Kephart, Our Southern Highlanders; Earle, op. cit., pp. 249 flf.; Williams, "A Fragment of the Passing Frontier," Hist. Teacher's Mag., VI, 33; Mac- Clintock, "The Kentucky Mountaineers and Their Feuds," Am. Jour. Soc, VII, I fi., 171 £E.; Vincent, "A Retarded Frontier," ibid., IV, i ff.; and Fox, "The Southern Mountaineer," Scribner's Mag., XXIX, 387, 556. CHAPTER II FACTORS AFFECTING HOUSEHOLD MANUFACTURES IN THE COLONIES During the colonial period there were certain general factors which tended to increase or diminish, encourage or discourage, the making of many of the necessities of life in the household or on the plantation. Stated generally, these factors were: (i) the policy of England toward the commerce and manufactures of her dependencies; (2) the general and special encouragement given household manu- factures by the various colonial legislative assemblies; and (3) certain economic conditions and political notions prev- alent in the colonies prior to the close of the Revolution. To show the effects of these three general factors on house- hold manufactures during the colonial period is the pur- pose of this chapter. No minute consideration of the complicated phases of each of the large divisions is at- tempted. They are considered only in so far as they affected, directly or indirectly, the making within the home or on the plantation of such articles as were made. England's colonial policy and household manufactures The mercantile colonial system which England at- tempted to administer throughout the century, beginning with the Restoration, was based on a political and 13 14 Household Manufactures in the United States economic theory generally current during the seventeenth century. According to this theory, colonies were merely possessions, subject to economic exploitation by the people at home. Fundamentally, the doctrine which England attempted to apply was that colonial dependencies should be subordinated, as far as their economic life was con- cerned, to the welfare of the mother-country. The appli- cation of this doctrine found expression in a series of laws, which included measures respecting navigation and enu- merated articles, encouragements to colonial industry, and restrictions on colonial manufactures and the exportation of men with a knowledge of, and implements used in, the manufacture of cotton, linen, and silk cloth. All these measures worked co-operatively during the colo- nial period; both directly and indirectly, toward en- couraging and sustaining household manufactures, or toward discouraging and preventing them, just how and to what extent the following discussion attempts to por- tray.* Prior to the Navigation Act of 1651 the colonies enjoyed a relative freedom of commerce. In truth, unlder the operations of this act they felt little or no restraint. It ' The writer's sole interest in the EngUsh colonial system is its relation to but one of the phases of the industrial life of the colonies, namely, house- hold manufactures. For brief discussions of the commercial phases of the system see the following: Ashley, "The Commercial Legislation of England and the American Colonies, 1660-1760," Surveys, Historic and Economic, pp. 309 ff.; Howard, Preliminaries of the Revolution, chap, iii; Channing, "The Navigation Laws,'' Proc. Am. Ant. Soc, VI, 160 ff.; Rabbeno, Ameri- can Commercial Policy, chaps, i-iii; and Callender, Econ. Hist, of U.S., chap. iii. A more extended discussion is found in Beer's The Commercial Policy of England toward the American Colonies. Factors Affecting Household Manufactures 15 was not until its virtual renewal in 1660' that restrictions began to affect them. As renewed, the act said that no produce could be imported into, or exported from, England, or from her colonies, except in ships belonging to, and built by, the people of England, Ireland, Wales, Berwick on the Tweed, or any of the plantations; that colonial pro- duce should be imported into England only in English or colonial ships; that foreign carriers should be absolutely excluded from the colonial market, whether shipping their own goods or not; and that certain products should be known as "enumerated articles" which could not be carried from the colonies to other places even in English ships. These articles were "sugars, tobacco, cotton-wool, indigoes, ginger, fustic, or other dyeing woods."^ Closely following this measure were those enacted in 1663 and 1672. The former intended to cut off entirely the import trade of the colonies in European goods, except salt for the New Eng- land fisheries, wines from the Western Islands or Azores, servants, horses, and victuals from Ireland and Scotland;^ and the latter subjected the whole traffic in "enumerated goods" between one colony and another to a penalty, com- pelling the trader who wished to carry a cargo of tobacco from Virginia to New York either to pay a tribute at the place of shipment or to give bond to unload his cargo in ' 12 Charles 11, c. 18. (All citations to the English laws are to Picker- ing's Statutes at Large.) ' This Hst was enlarged from time to time. Rice and molasses were added to it in 1705; and copper, beaver skins, and other furs in 1722 (3 and 4 Anne, c. s, sec. 12; 8 Geo. I, c. 15, sec. 24, and c. 18, sec. 22). For a history of these enumerated commodities see Beer, op. cit., chap. iii. 3 15 Charles II, c. 7, sees, s and 6. i6 Household Manufactures in the United States an English port.' Since these two laws, together with the one of 1660, formed the basis of the complex and multi- farious restrictions and regulations on trade and commerce during most of the colonial period, it will add nothing to the discussion to go into the variations of, and additions to, them. Enough has been said to call attention to their existence and the general nature of their provisions. The discussion will now turn to their probable effects upon household manufactures during the period of their existence. While the navigation laws were loosely administered and generally evaded, yet they seem to have had certain observable effects on the amount of manufacturing done by the people, both in and out of their homes, or the opposite effect of discouraging them in their attempts to manu- facture, by making other employments more profitable, whereby means could be secured to buy foreign goods. Prior to 1660 the colonists, when possible, obtained most of their textile supplies directly from Holland or from Great Britain, paying for them with tar, boards, tobacco, hides, and farm products. The laws of 1660, 1663, and 1672, by stimulating shipbuilding in New England, by subjecting the traffic in enumerated goods between one colony and another to a penalty, and by forbidding trade with the Dutch, from whom goods could be procured cheaper than from the English, tended to stimulate the manufacture of sailcloth for the New England ships, as well as articles that had previously been secured in a free and open market. Such manufacturing was carried on chiefly in the homes or on the plantations, since the handicraft system and manu- ' 25 Charles II, c. 7, sec. 2. Factors Affecting Household Manufactures 17 facturing establishments had but a vague existence in any of the colonies' so early in their history. Home manufacturiug was also augmented, especially in New England, the middle colonies, and the back-country region of the southern colonies, by certain regulations and restrictions in favor of the English proprietors. These included the prohibiting of the importation into England from the colonies of agricultural products, such as rye, barley, peas, beans, oats, and wheat; and of salt provisions, including beef, pork, bacon, and butter.^ The cutting off of these staple conunodities from the localities mentioned above forced the people to seek markets elsewhere. Since these markets were largely found in countries doing little or no manufacturing, their ships could not bring back manufactured commodities, hence had to make a round- about trip and load in England, where cash had to be exchanged for ready-made articles. Thus, as Howard remarks, " the economic policy of Parliament had partially deprived the colonists of the means of importing the manu- factures which they needed."^ Hence it followed that "New England, and later the Middle Colonies, not being allowed to exchange their normal products for England's " It should be said, however, that these laws also stimulated manu- facturing outside of the homes. Commenting on this point, Rabbeno remarks: "It was therefore precisely that monopoly, by means of which the mother-coimtry sought to bind the colonial trade, to the advantage of her own merchants, which compelled the work and the capital of the colo- nists to be dedicated to the neglected field of domestic manufactures" {The American Colonial Policy, p. S7). = Beer, op. cit., p. 74. 3 Preliminaries of the Revolution, p. 6i. i8 Household Manufactures in the United States manufactures, were forced to begin manufacturing for themselves."' Certain contemporary reports attest the truth of these statements. In 1705 Lord Cornbury gave as a cause of the beginning of manufactures in New York "the want wherewithal to make returns for England."" It was said of Massachusetts in 1721 that necessity and not choice forced the people to manufacturing, because they did not have suflScient commodities of their own to give in exchange for those they received from Great Britain.^ A report of the Board of Trade to the House of Commons, in February 1731/32, referring to the section north of Maryland, said: "They have no staple commodities of their own growth to exchange for our manufactures, which puts them under great necessity, as well as under greater temptation, of providing them for themselves."* The restrictions on certain eniunerated articles had the effect in the southern colonies of inducing them to raise their staple products and exchange these in England for all sorts of manufactured articles. Virginia and Maryland and the northern part of North Carolina exchanged tobacco for such commodities; South Carolina and Georgia, rice and indigo; and North Carolina, naval stores. A monop- oly of the English market was given these colonies on all such staples, with a bounty on naval stores extra. To make the monopoly complete, the production of tobacco ' Beer, op. cit., p. 75. 'Docs. Rel. Col. Hist, of N.Y., IV, 1151. 3 Ibid., V, 598. < Macpherson, Annals of Commerce, etc., Ill, 190. Factors Affecting Household Manufactures 19 was prohibited in England, and Spanish tobacco was excluded by very high duties.' To help South Carolina and Georgia monopolize the rice trade it was provided in George II's reign that, after September, 1730, they could send their rice directly to any country south of Cape Finisterre.'' Bounties on naval stores, offered both in England and in North Carolina, were the inducements to their production and exportation.' Besides the monopolized English market which the southern colonies had for their tobacco, special arrange- ments existed in Maryland and Virginia whereby it could be conveniently exchanged for English merchandise. On the navigable rivers and bays in these two colonies were tobacco warehouses, at a distance of about twelve or four- teen miles from each other, to which all the tobacco in the provinces could be brought and inspected according to law.'' The inspectors gave the planters notes of receipt and the merchants took these notes for their goods. Warehouses in which were kept all sorts of British commodities and manufactures were also established by the merchants all over the provinces. To these the planters would resort and supply themselves with what they wanted, paying for it in inspection receipts or taking credit.' On the whole, therefore, the most profitable employment of the people '■ Beer, op. cii., pp. 46 f. ' 3 Geo. II, c. 28, sec. 2. This act was to continue for five years. It was renewed from time to time. See 8 Geo. II, c. 19; 15 Geo. II, c. 33; 20 Geo. II, c. 47; and 27 Geo. II, c. 18. ' These bounties are discussed in the following section. ^Hening, Statutes at Large of Va. (Richmond, 1820), IV, 251. "Am. Husbandry (177s), I, 225 f. 20 Household Manufactures in the United States of the southern colonies along the navigable rivers was agriculture, since their staple products found such a ready and monopolized market in Europe. Except when the tobacco and rice markets became dull, the crops failed, or transportation was obstructed, they gave little attention to manufacturing on the plantations prior to 1765. Brief mention should be made of another phase of the restrictions upon imports and exports, namely, the system of duties and drawbacks which was intended to encourage the colonies to trade with England, and at the same time keep them satisfied in doing so, thus preventing their engaging in any kind of manufacturing. As early as 1642/43 Parliament passed an act which tended to decrease the small amount of manufacturing that was being done at this date in the homes. This act provided that all merchandise intended for the use of the colonies should be exempted from duties, subsidies, and taxation, as well as colonial produce exported to England. It was expected that such a law would make the colonists producers of raw materials, since they could be furnished with a cheap supply of manufactured goods from England.' From this feeble beginning the drawback system later developed into a very complicated affair. As a general rule the colonial products sent to England paid the same duties as prod- ucts from foreign countries, and coramodities exported to the colonies were charged the same duties as those sent to foreign states. To both these rules, however, there were many exceptions in favor of the colonies. Their tobacco paid less duty than Spanish; their pig and bar iron, hemp " Bishop, Hist, of Am. Manufactures, I, 303. Factors Ajffecting Household Manufactures 21 and lumber, indigo and raw silk, pot and pearl ashes, were all exempt from duties by 1751.' The drawbacks were equally favorable to them. These often amounted to almost the entire duty, and in some cases the whole duty was actually repaid on re-exportation from England. This was true of tobacco under the reigns of James II, William III, Anne, George I, and George II.' One very important effect of the system of drawbacks was the making possible of the enormous consumption of foreign linens in the region south of Pennsylvania. Beer states that the inhabitants of England often complained of the system because the colonies were thereby able to get certain foreign commodities more cheaply than they themselves could purchase them.' Nearly all the linens imported from Germany and Holland were re-exported thither, since they could not compete with similar. Irish and English goods on account of the heavy import duties. The whole system was intended to encourage the colonists in their production of raw materials as well as their con- sumption of manufactured goods from England, thus mak- ing it more convenient and profitable for them to get on without applying themselves to manufacturing of any kind. The measures relating to the encouragement of colonial industries took the form of bounties on the growth and production of a number of articles which were either not ' For iron, see Saxby, British Customs, p. 32; indigo, ibid., p. 177; raw silk, 23 Geo. II, c. 20; ashes, 24 Geo. II, c. 51; lumber, 8 Geo. I, c. 12; tobacco, 12 Chas. II, c. 4; hemp, 8 Geo. I, c. 12. = For the various subsidies, see 9 and 10 William III, c. 23; 2 and 3 Anne, c. 9; and 21 Geo. II, c. 2. 3 Op. cit., p. 106. 22 Household Manufactures in the United States produced in England at all, or, if produc'ed, not in suffi- cient quantities to supply the demand for them. These encouragements were given especially for the benefit of the colonies north of Maryland. The bounties were expected to give this region staples to send to England to exchange for manufactured goods — for the lack of such staples some manufacturing had already been done. The bounty system, as worked out after 1705, included premiiims on indigo, tar, pitch, hemp, turpentine, masts, and allied products. During Queen Anne's reign the follow- ing bounties were offered: good merchantable tar and pitch, £4 a ton of eight barrels; turpentine or rosin, £3 a ton; hemp, water-rotted, bright and clear, £6 a ton; and all masts, yards, bowsprits, £1 a ton, allowing 40 feet to each ton. The law was to be in force for nine years.' On expiring it was renewed for eleven years,^ and was continued with more or less uniformity until the Revolu- tion.^ Meager results were obtained from hemp and masts by the foregoing act,'' but those from pitch and tar were more encouraging. The products of New England under the first year of the act amounted to 6,191 barrels of tar, 647 of pitch, 1,14s of turpentine, and 90 of rosin. While these were of an inferior quality, yet the bounty was allowed on ' 3 and 4 Anne, c. 10. ' For renewals, see 12 Anne, c. 9, and 2 Geo. II, c. 35. s Beer, op. cit., 95. Indigo was included in the foregoing list by the act of 1748, which offered a bounty of six pence a pound for all indigo imported into England from the colonies (21 Geo. II, c. 30, sec. i). * Beer, op. cit., pp. 96, 99. Factors Affecting Household Manufactures 23 them, because it was felt that, if disallowed, the New Englanders would be discouraged in their attempts at further production and return to their spinning-wheels and looms.' Between 1706 and 1729 bounties were paid on naval stores to the amount of £430,178, and between 1729 and 1774, £1,028,584.^ About the year 1717 the tar, pitch, and turpentine sent to England annually was worth £47,072.' But in spite of these figures the bounty system failed to give the people north of Maryland a staple. The pine forests were in the South, and it was from here that most of the goods on which bounties were paid came. Governor Johnson, of North Carolina, writing to the Board of Trade in 1734, said: "There is more pitch and tar in the two Carolinas than in all the other Provinces on the Continent and rather more in this than in South Carolina."'' The same thing was true of indigo. In 1734 South Carolina exported 216,924 pounds, and shortly before the Revolution the amount reached 1,107,660 pounds.^ But how did the bounty system affect home manufac- tures? The Board of Trade felt that it lessened them. In 1728, when the law was up for renewal, this body reported to a committee of the Privy Council as follows: " Upon further Inquiry into the Matter, we don't find that " Lord, Indust. Experiments in the British Colonies, p. 66. » Channing, Hist, of U.S., III, 35, note. > Docs. Rel. Col. Hist, of N.Y., V, 617. 4 Col. Rec. N.C., IV, s- 5 Ramsay, Hist, of S.C, II, 212. 24 Household Manufactures in the United States these People had the same Temptation to go on with these Manufactures [meaning those in the home] during that Time the Bounty upon Naval Stores subsisted, having then Encouragement to employ their leisure Time in another way, & more profitable to themselves and this Kingdom."' The same idea was expressed in a report which the Board of Trade made to the House of Lords in 1 733 J with the additional information that even though household manufacturing had been diminished, yet the quantity of goods then made in New England was sufl&cient to lessen the amount of Great Britain's exports thither.^ This was a mild way of admitting that the bounty system as it worked out failed to give the northern people a staple to send to England to exchange for manufactured goods. It should be said, however, that it did add to those the South already had, thus making this section more able to purchase imported gdods and relieving the people of the laborious and unprofitable task of manufacturing them in their homes. The diminishing effect in the northern colonies was probably very slight. The restrictions on manufactures were of two kinds, namely, those forbidding the setting up of certain manu- factures in the colonies, and those prohibiting the exporta- tion of men with a knowledge of, and implements used in, fabricating cotton, woolen, linen, and silk cloth. It was not until the close of the seventeenth century that the colonial manufactures became of sufficient importance to arouse the effective opposition of the English manufacturers ' NJ. Archives, ist ser., V, 209. ' Conn. Hist. Soc. Colls., V, App., 461. Factors Affecting Household Manufactures 25 and merchants. The laws of 1699, 1732, and 1750, restrain- ihg and restricting such operations, sought to crush what- ever forms had already sprung up; and those of 1718, 1750, 1774, 1781, and 1782, relating to the machinery used in, and men with a knowledge of, the manufacture of textile fabrics, sought to keep within the kingdom the knowl- edge of all the novel processes and improvements along these lines. On account of what was called at the time the daily increase of woolen manufactures in the English plantations in America, the following law was enacted in 1699: That from and after the first day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand six hundred ninety-nine, no wool, woolfells, shortlings, mortlings, woolflocks, worsted, bay, or woollen yam cloth serge, bays, says, frizes, druggets, cloth-serges, shaUoons, or any other drapery stuffs or woollen manufactures whatsoever, made or mixed with wool or woolflocks, being a product or manu- facture of any of the English plantations in America, shall be loaden on board any ship or vessel, in any place or parts within any of the said English plantations, upon any pretence whatsoever.' This law also provided that none of the foregoing manu- factures could be loaded upon any horse, cart, or carriage to be exported to any of the other English plantations. However, it did not interfere with the making of woolen articles within the family for domestic needs. But fear- ing that the German Palatines, who came to New York in 1709, would set up woolen manufactures in opposition to this law, the Board of Trade provided that a clause could be placed in the patent making it void if they should apply ' 10 and II William III, c. 10. 26 Household Manufactures in the United States themselves in this direction. Such a clause was actually inserted when the patent was issued/ A somewhat similar policy found expression in the laws of 1732 and 1750. The former aimed to localize the hat- making industry by providing that no hats could be exported to any other colony, and that only those who had served an apprenticeship could engage in making hats.^ In order to create a greater demand for woolen and other manufactures of Great Britain by encouraging the colonies to send bar and pig iron thither, it was enacted in 1750 that bar iron be duty-free to the port of London, and pig iron to any port of England; and that no mill or other engine for rolling or slitting iron, no plating forge to work with a tilt hammer, nor any furnace for making steel be erected in the colonies.* In 1718 the mother-country began her policy of pro- tecting her own manufacturing interests by a series of acts forbidding the exportation of men with a knowledge of, and implements used in, the fabrication of cotton, woolen, linen, and silk cloth. It was enacted in this year that anyone convicted of enticing from England any artificer or manufacturer should be fined £100 and im- prisoned for three months.'' This act was renewed in 1750, with an extra provision making it unlawful to export from Great Britain or Ireland any utensils made use of in the woolen and silk manufacture. The fine for enticing away artificers or manufacturers was increased to £500 and twelve ' Docs. Rel. Col. Hist, of N.Y., V, 88, 118. ' 5 Geo. II, c. 22. 3 23 Geo. II, c. 29. * 5 Geo. I, c. 27. Factors Affecting Household Manufactures 27 months' imprisonment, and for exporting utensils £200 and forfeiture of the tools.' ■ In 1774 this law was extended to include utensils used in the manufacture of cotton and linen cloth.^ In 1781 the law of, 1774 was extended by an elaborated act, which imposed a penalty of £200 and twelve months' imprisonment for the attempt to export any machine, engine, tool, press, paper, utensil, or imple- ment used for preparing, working, completing, or finishing woolen, cotton, linen, or silk manufactures.' The next year (1782) the acts of 1718 and 1750 were renewed and elaborated so as to make it a penalty to entice out of Great Britain a workman acquainted with novel processes in the manufacture of cotton and linen goods."* Taken as a whole, all the foregoing measures regarding colonial manufactures tended to increase the amount of manufacturing in the homes. Under such restrictions no general shop or factory system of manufacturing textile commodities could grow up ; hence it was necessary to make within the homes or on the plantations textile and other supplies which could not, be furnished by obstructed impor- tations and shop manufacturing. Commenting on this point, Rabbeno says: "The high price of imported textile fabrics caused by the monopoly, compelled thfe colonists to make use of skins as clothes, and at the same time was a stimulus to the domestic industry of weaving, which, however, could only be carried on almost secretly within ' 23 Geo. II, c. 13. ' 14 Geo. Ill, c. 71. Wool cards were not included. 3 21 Geo. Ill, c. 37. * 22 Geo. Ill, c. 60. 28 Household Manufactures in the United States the walls of private houses and with primitive implements.'" BoUes, discussing the same points, remarks: "The law could not reach these private factories. Parliament could club down the ripening fruit which hung in plain sight on the branches; but the million buds forming in secret under the bark, which a favoring time would eventually bring out into bloom, were beyond its reach."^ THE colonies' POLICY OF ENCOURAGEMENT During all the time that Parliament was busy legislat- ing to bring about the success of England's antiquated commercial policy toward the colonies the corresponding bodies in the various provinces were equally as busy legis- lating to bring about in their communities conditions which would free them, partially at least, from the burdens of such a policy. The colonial legislation affecting household manufactures pertained mainly to the encouragement of the raising of wool, hemp, and flax, and the manufacturing of these into clothing and household textile supplies. All this legislation is of special importance to the subject under discussion, as a supply of clothing was one of life's neces- sities. Since the acquisition of an abundant supply from the outside world was hampered by so many factors, the lawmakers, early in the history of many of the colonies, took upon themselves the solution of the problem through legislative enactments. In order to show the trend of this legislation, the laws enacted in Massachusetts and Vir- ginia have been considered at some length. Only brief ' Op. cit., p. 69. " Indust. Hist, of U.S., p. 371. Factors Affecting Household Manufactures 29 footnote mention of, and reference to, similar measures in the remaining colonies have been deemed necessary, since they were largely duplications of those passed by the assemblies of Massachusetts and Virginia. In 1640' the General Court of Massachusetts passed two laws to encourage the manufacture of linen, woolen, and cotton cloth. In May of this year it was ordered that the magistrates and deputies of the towns inquire what seed there was in every town; what men and women were skil- ful in breaking, spinning, and weaving; what means there were for providing wheels; and see that the boys and girls were taught to spin.^ The other law provided for a bounty on linen, woolen, and cotton cloth made in the province. It was passed in October and read as follows: For incouragement of the manufacture of linnen, woollen, and cotton clothe, it is ordered, that whosoever shall make any sort of the said cloathes fit for use & shall shewe the same to the next magis- trate, or to 2 of the deputies of this Court, upon certificate thereof to this Court, or the Court of Assistants, the party shall have allowance of 3 rf in the shilling of the worth of such cloth, according to the valewation wch shalbee certified wth it. And the said magistrate, or deputies shall set such marke upon the same cloth as it may bee found to have bene alowed for; pvided, this order shall extend onely ' The Plymouth Colony had done some legislating even before this date. On July I, 1633, the General Court ordered "that no sheep be sold out of the colony, under penalty of forfeiting their due value" (Rec. Plymouth Col., I, 13). If anyone owning sheep moved out of the colony, he must first ofiEer them for sale. If no buyers appeared, he was then permitted to take his sheep along with him (j,bid., II, 17). On June 4, 1639, it ^^s ordered that every householder sow one "rodd of ground square at least with hemp or flax yearly" (ihid., XI, Part I, 32). " Rec. Co. Mass. Bay, I, 294. 30 Household Manufactures in the United States to such cloth as shall bee made wth in this iurisdiction, & the yarne heare spun also, & of such materials as shalbee raised also wth in the same, or else of cotton. This order to continue 3 years next following.' The enthusiasm of the deputies exemplified in this October law proved to be greater than the financial con- dition of the colony could sustain. It was repealed in less than a year, because the people felt that it was "burthen- some to their wants."^ On the same day that the bounty law was repealed one was passed relating to the growing and gathering of wild hemp to take the place of cotton, which was then very scarce. This law provided that the deputies of the General Court should see that in their several towns speedy notice be given to masters of families of the wild hemp, with direc- tion when to gather and how to use it. Should anyone harvest more than was needed for home consumption, there was a ready market for it. The deputies were to aid in marketing the surplus. Clothing at this time seems to have been rather scarce, for the court made mention of the want of clothing which was likely to come upon them the next winter. It was also desired that all mothers should see that their children and servants were indus- triously employed in spinning so that the mornings and evenings might not be lost as they had formerly been.' Another law was passed in 1642, which purposed to increase ' Rec. Co. Mass. Bay, I, 303. 'Ibid., I, 321. The following is found in the records of June i, 1641: "Heniy Kemball & John Witheredge alowance for 83 J yrd. of cloth, valewed at 12 (2 p yrd" (ibid., p. 316). ^Ibid., I, 322. Factors Affecting Household Manufactures 31 household manufacturing through the fostering of a knowl- edge of spinning and weaving. By this law the selectmen were given power to apprentice the children of parents unable to bring them up in accordance with its provisions. Such children were to be set to weaving and spinning. A sufficient supply of hemp, flax, tools, and implements was to be provided by the selectmen.^ These first laws related more to linen than to woolen manufactures. But beginning with the order of May, 1645, there followed during the next twenty years several measures relating to sheep and wool. Conditions at this date are vividly set forth in the preamble of the 1645 law, which read as follows: Forasmuch as wollen cloth is so useful a comodity w"'out w* wee cannot so comfortably subsist in these pts by reason of could winters, it being also at p sent very scare & deare amongs' us, & is likely shortly so to be, in all those pts fro™ whenc we can expect it, by reason of y" warrs in Europe destroying, in a great measure, y" flocks of sheepe amongst y™, & also y" trade & meanes it selfe of making woollen cloath & stuffs, by y" killing & oth'wise hind'ing of such p sons whose skill & labors tended to y' end; & whereas, through y" want of woollen cloaths & stuffs, many pore people have suffered much could and hardship, to y° impairing of some of y" healths, & y° hazarding of some of y'"' lives, & such who have bene able to p ^ Ibid., II, 7. While Massachusetts Bay was busy legislating to encourage the manufacture of linen and cotton goods, the lawmakers of Connecticut were not idle. As early as February, 1640, the General Court ordered each family to sow hemp and flax so that in time it might have a supply of linen clothing (Pub. Rec. Col. Conn., I, 61). At the same session of the court it was enacted that the governor should order a supply of cotton, and that each town should take its share of the same (ibid., p. 59). When the cotton arrived in September, 1642, Winsor took 90 pounds worth; Wethersfield, no; and Hartford, 200 (Bishop, op. cit., I, 300). 32 Household Manufactures in the United States vide for y'' child'n cloathing of cotton cloth (not being able to get oth') have, by y* meanes, had some of y'' child'n much scorched w*'' fire, yea, divers hurt to death, this Co't y' fore doth hereby desire all y° townes seriously to weigh y= p mises, & accordingly y* yo" will carefully endeavo' y" p servation & increase of such sheepe as they have already, as also to p cure more, w"" all convenient speede, nto y" sev'aU townes, by all such lawfull wayes and meanes as God shall put into their hands.' Further encouragement was given in 1648 by provisions made for the pasturing of sheep upon the Common* and offering bounties for the killing of wolves, which were very- destructive of all sorts of small live stock. ^ In 1654 the exportation of sheep and the killing of any under two years of age, save for the use of the owner's family, was pro- hibited."* The exportation of wool to any foreign country was forbidden in 1675.' One of the most important early laws looking to the supply of clothing was the one passed in May, 1656. To remedy the inconvenience and suffering arising from the ^Rec. Co. Mass. Bay, I, 105. 'Ibid., I, 251 f. 3 It was a fixed policy to pay bounties for killing wolves. As early as 1630 a bounty was offered for killing them. This was repealed in 1632, but renewed in 1640. The bounty was increased in 1644, 1645, 1648, 1661, and 1662. For these laws iu the order named, see ibid., 81, 102; II, 85, 103, 252; IV, ^. This was a fixed policy, not only in Massachusetts, but in all the other colonies as well. Since wolves were a general danger, and destroyed other stock as well as sheep, no attempt has been made to trace this legislation in the various colonies. *lbid.,lll,5ssi- s Ibid., Ill, 28. Such legislation was very common in many of the north- em colonies and in some of the southern. Since it related but indirectly to household manufactures, no detailed consideration has been given it. Factors Affecting Household Manufactures 33 inadequate supply of wearing apparel, the General Court ordered that all hands not necessarily employd on other occasions, as woemen, girles, & boyes, shall, & hereby are, enjoyned to spin according to their skill & abilitie; & that the selectmen in euery towne doe con- sider the condition & capacitie of euery familie, & accordingly to assess them, as one or more spinners 2'y. & that euery one thus assessed for a whole spinner doe, after this psent year, 1656, spin, for 30 weekes euery yeare. 3 pound p weeke of lining, cotton, or wooling .... under the poenalty of 12 i for euery pound short. If families were employed otherwise the greater part of their time, they were to be assessed a half or a quarter of a spinner." Weeden thinks that from 1660 to the end of the century there was a decline in the interest in promoting manufac- tures.^ This decline was caused by the activity in fishing and shipbuilding, growing out of the events accompanying the Restoration. The navigation acts tended to stimulate shipbuilding and trade in New England. Fishing to load ships and building ships to carry cured fish absorbed much of the energy of the people in the coast towns during these years. On their return for more fish the vessels would bring cargoes of textiles and other manufactured goods. But on the opening of the new century and as a result of the shipbuilding craze the lawmakers again took up the problem of increasing hemp-growing and its manufacture into clothing, as well as into duck, canvas, and cordage to equip the ships. ' Ibid., Ill, 396 f. ' Econ. and Soc. Hist, of N. Eng., I, 303. 34 Household Manufactures in the United States During the first forty years of the eighteenth century there was considerable legislating to stimulate the raising of hemp and flax. In June, 1701, the General Court granted a bounty of i farthing a pound to anyone who would purchase all the hemp grown in the colony at 4 farthings a pound/ Another act bearing on the same sub- ject was passed in 17 15. It provided for a premium of gs. ^. on every 112 pounds of water-rotted, well-cured, and cleanly dressed hemp, and so in proportion for a greater quantity.^ This bounty was doubled in 1718,' and in 1725 the act was re-enacted with the additional provision that if anyone brought 224 pounds, all of which he had grown in one year, he should have 45. iM. a hundred addi- tional to the usual recompense. In 1728 this act was renewed; and in 1731 the reward was raised to 295. on each 112 pounds, and the bonus was increased to 7s. a hundred. Another advance was made in 1735. The gratuity at this time was fixed at 585. for 112 pounds of well-dressed hemp, and 375. 4^. for 112 pounds of well- dressed flax. To anyone bringing over 112 pounds of hemp, an additional 145. a hundred was given. For flax the bonus was gs. a hundred.'' The climax of this legisla- tion came in 1742, when, by order of the General Court, flax certificates were received by the province treasurer for tax.' Along with and following the foregoing acts were those intended to foster the manufacture of articles made from » Acts and Resolves, Public and Private, of the Prov. Mass. Bay, I, 473. " Ibid., II, 28. 4 Ibid., pp. 362, 498, s88, 737 i. 3 IbU., p. 102. s ibU., XIII, App., VIII, 188. Factors Ajffecting Household Manufactures 35 hemp and flax. One of the first of these was a law to promote the linen manufacture, especially the making of canvas or duck for ships' sails, passed in 1722. This measure provided that the justices of each county or some- one appointed by them should once a year pass on all pieces of linen twenty yards long and one yard wide made of flax of the growth and manufacture of the province. Three of the best pieces were to be selected and the owners were to be paid double their value, said value to be determined by a "just and equal appraisement." The treasurer of the colony was to select three of the best pieces presented to him and pay a premium of 40s. in bills of credit. The act was to continue for five years.' The reward was renewed on canvas and duck in 1726.^ The records show that bounties were claimed in 1724 and allowed in 1727 and 1728.3 The next important act was the one to encourage the making of linen cloth, passed in 1753. Its intent and purpose was to provide instruction in spinning, weaving, ' Ibid., II, 241 f. =" Ibid., XI, App., VI; S2. 5 In 1724 Nathan Thomas petitioned for the premiums on two pieces of linen cloth which he had presented to the county of Plymouth as the best made therein. The court refused to give him a certificate signifying that his pieces were the best, because no others had been presented {ibid., X, App., V, S4i)- In 1727 the province treasurer was ordered to pay to the county treasurer of Bristol County £19 for premiums on three pieces of linen {ibid., XI, App., VI, 290). The treasurer of Hampshire County was voted, in 1728, £13 is. 8d. to reimburse the county for money paid for the three best pieces of linen {ibid., XI, App., VI, 322). In 1734 Connecticut passed a measure similar to the one summarized above. In May of this year the General Court offered a premium of 4d. a 36 Household Manufactures in the United States and other phases of the linen manufacture. For this pur- pose the sum of £1,500 was voted by the General Court in the form of a tax on every coach, chariot, chaise, calash, and chair within the province. The money thus raised was to be spent in providing in Boston a house in which at least one person from every town was to be instructed free of charge in spinning, weaving, and the other requisite operations connected with the manufacture of linen cloth. The idea was to furnish work for the destitute women and children in many of the towns. The tax was to continue for five years. It was supposed that at the end of this time the £1,500 would be raised.' The law expired by limita- tion, and the house provided from the tax which it imposed was ordered sold in 1780 to secure money for the army.^ During the remainder of the colonial period the people of Massachusetts were left to their own initiative to employ themselves in raising wool, hemp, and flax, and in manu- pound for every pound of good hemp, well-dressed, water-rotted, grown in the colony; one of 20s. for every bolt or piece of well-wrought canvas or duck, fit for use, and thirty-six yards in length and thirty inches wide, weighing not less than forty-five pounds, and made in the colony; also one oi 2s.a. yard for fine linen cloth, well-spun, woven, and whitened, a yard wide, and made of yarn that was eight runs to the pound, and pro rata for cloth wider or narrower, provided that none was to be narrower than' three- fourths of a yard (Pub. Rec. Col. Conn. [1726-35], P- S^^). This act expired by limitation in five years, at which time it was renewed for another period of equal length because of the profit and advantage that had accrued to the people from it during the past five years {ibid. [1735-43], p. 318). ' Acts and Resolves, Public and Private, of the Prov. Mass. Bay, III, 680. ^ Acts and Laws of the Commonwealth of Mass. (1780-81), pp. 210, 220. Factors AJfecting Household Manufactures 37 facturing them into wearing apparel and household textile supplies.' During the seventeenth century Virginia consistently followed the policy of encouraging weaving, spinning, and the raising of sheep, hemp, and flax. As early as 1646 it was provided that two children from each county should be sent to James City to be employed in carding, knitting, and spirming. Two houses in which they were to be taught these trades were to be built in the city. By the same law it was provided that certain children could be bound out to tradesmen and husbandmen to be brought up in some ' The remaining New England colonies were not entirely indifferent to encouraging the manufacture of linen and woolen cloth. At the 1750-51 session of the General Assembly in Rhode Island an act was passed for promoting the raising of flax and wool and for manufacturing them into cloth. The bounty on cloth manufactured of wool or flax, of a certain tex- ture and length, was one-third its appraised value; that on every pound of cured and dressed flax, one penny a pound {Rec. Col. R.I. and Providence Plantations, V, 318). This law was repealed in June, 1751, before it went into effect, for fear the part referring to wool would be unwelcome in Eng- land {ibid., p. 340). New Hampshire as early as 1719 offered a bounty of 12 pence a pound for a period of three years on all merchantable hemp grown in the province {Laws of N.H., edited by Batchellor, 11, 330). This same year sheep were exempted from taxation for seven years, and to kill any ewe lamb during the next two years was a crime {ibid., p. 335). The middle colonies did not pursue the consistent policy of encouraging the production of hemp and wool and manufacture of cloth that was pursued in New England. Nothing of any consequence was done in Delaware and New York. Pennsylvania and New Jersey offered hmited bounties, the former beginning quite early. The following is a record of part of the pro- ceedings of the Council held in Philadelphia on the twenty-sixth of the first month, 1684: "A Bill read for hemp & flax, Linnen & Wool'n Cloth. Lin- nen & Woollen Cloth to have a price set upon it by ye County Court, ye hemp at sd. the pound and ye flax at 8d p pound; Quest: put; past in ye Afiirma" {Minutes of the Council of Pa., I, 98). In 1701 it was ordered 38 Household Manufactures in the United States useful calling/ This measure was followed by others of more or less importance to household and plantation manu- facturing. In 1656 authority was given Northampton County to govern and promote her own manufactures, among which the woolen industry was of considerable importance.^ Following this came a number of laws relat- ing to wool. A fine of 50 pounds of tobacco was imposed in 1658 for every pound of wool exported. This law was repealed the next year, but was re-enacted in 1662. In 1671 it was again repealed, only to be re-enacted eleven years later. Such a law was in reality intended more for the encouragement of the handicraftsmen than family manufactures. These tradesmen, however, did not seem to take advantage of it, since their failure in this respect was given as the reason for its repeal in 1671.' Beguming in 1662 a series of laws to stimulate the spin- ning and weaving of cloth was enacted. On account of the low price of tobacco and the abundance of the crop, the Assembly in this year passed a measure which was intended to turn the attention of the planters to things other than that everyone that owned 40 acres of cleared land should keep at least ten sheep (ibid., 11, 27). In 1722 the bounty was id. a pound on hemp (Pa. Statutes at Large, III, 314); and from March s, 1729, to January 26, 1730, it was paid on 35,251 pounds of hemp, and from March 3, 1730, to July 2, 1731, upon 17,266 pounds (Giesecke, Am. Commercial Legislation before ijSg, p. 63). New Jersey granted a bounty on hemp and flax in 1765 and renewed it in 1768 (iV./. Archives, ist ser.,XVII, 414, 498). ■Hening, Statutes at Large (New York, 1823), I, 336. 'Ibid., p. 396; also Wise, op. cit., p. 303. ' For these laws in the order mentioned, see Hening, op. cit., 1, 488, 525; II, 124, 287, 493- Factors Affecting Household Manufactures 39 the raising of this single staple. A premium of 3 pounds of tobacco was offered to "whoever will spin the fHax and cause the yarne to be weaved into cloath of a yard wide," and 5 pounds for "every yard of woollen cloath made of yarne here spun in the country.'" This law was repealed four years later (1666), because it was then felt that the people could see how beneficial it was to make linen and woolen cloth, and hence would continue it of their own accord.' However, in order to provide for the more difl&- cult operation of weaving, an ordinance was passed the same year requiring each county to maintain a weaver and loom at its own expense. The obstructions to trade and the nakedness of the country at the time required that some steps be taken for promoting manufactures. The idea in the law was to secure weavers and looms to weave the yam spun by the women and children. It was estimated that five women or the same number of children of twelve or thirteen years of age could annually spin enough yarn to supply sufl&cient clothing for thirty persons. A thousand pounds of tobacco was the penalty for non-compliance with the law. No county was excused, even if private looms had been set up.' The scope of this law was enlarged in September, 1668, when the commissioners of each county court, by the assistance of the vestries of the parishes of the county, were empowered to build houses in which poor children were to be educated and instructed in the arts of spinning, weaving, and other useful occupations and trades."* " Ibid., II, 120. 3 Ihid.,^ p. 238. " Ibid., p. 241. * Ibid., p. 267. 40 Household Manufaciures in the United States In 1682' the law for the encouragement of the manu- facture of linen and woolen cloth, enacted in 1662, was re-enacted and enlarged. Premiums were offered for dressed flax and hemp, linen and woolen cloth, linsey- woolsey, hats, and woolen or worsted hose. Every tith- able was also compelled to make one pound of dressed hemp and flax or two pounds of either. The law was to continue for three years.^ It was disallowed, however, by the Commissioners of the Customs on the ground that it dimin- ished correspondence between the mother-coimtry and the colony; weakened the dependence of the colonial popu- lation upon England; curtailed the freight which was furnished to English shipping; narrowed the market for English woolens and other manufactures; advanced the cost of tobacco to the English consumer by raising the charges on navigation; and, finally, reduced the volume of the customs.' Because of this disallowance the law was ' This same year Maryland passed an act to encourage the making of linen and woolen cloth within the province. For every yard of linen cloth three-quarters of a yard wide a premium of 6 pounds of tobacco was offered, and for every yard of woolen cloth the same width one of lo pounds of tobacco (Archives of Md., VII, 324). A reward was also offered this same year of one pound of tobacco for every pound of good merchantable flax or hemp raised in the province {ibid., pp. 323 f.). Both these laws were to run three years. The latter was renewed in 1688 with the bounty doubled. This act was to continue for seven years {ibid., XIII, 222). At the same session an act forbidding the exportation of wool out of the province was passed {ibid., p. 223). In 1695 a hundred pounds of tobacco were given to each person who converted a hundred pounds of flax or hemp into cordage {iUd., XIX, 173). " Hening, op. cit., II, 503. 3 " Report of the Commissioners of Customs, 1683," British State Papers, "Colonial," sec. 82; cited by Bruce, Econ. Hist, of Va., etc., II, 464. Factors Affecting Household Manufactures 41 repealed in 1684, but re-enacted in 1686 to continue till the end of the 1690 session of the Assembly,^ at which time, April, 1691, it was revived for a period of three years.^ In 1693 the part referring to linen was continued for six years longer.^ After the law limiting the fabrication and exportation of woolen manufactures, enacted by Parliament in 1699,'' Virginia seems to have given up her general policy of encouraging such industries. Since this law was in direct conformity to the one passed by her Assembly in 1682, there was probably little opposition to it in this colony. Whatever clothing the planter made was largely for use on the plantation and not for exportation. There was little indication at this time that woolen manufactures would ever pass beyond the point of supplying the planta- tion needs; hence, why should there be any objection to a law forbidding the exportation of such goods? At any rate, whatever manufacturing was done after 1700 was largely on the initiative of the manufacturer, for the general policy of public encouragement was abandoned after this date.^ " Hening, op. cit., Ill (Philadelphia, 1823), 16, 30. ' Ibid., p. so. ' Ibid., pp. 121 f. * See above, p. 25. 5 The southern colonies as a whole took little interest in encouraging the production and manufacture of hemp, flax, and wool between 1700 and 1 765. While South Carolina periodically offered during these years bounties on the production of hemp, yet such bounties were intended to encourage its production for exportation more than for manufacture in the colony For these bounty laws, see Cooper, Statutes at Large of S.C., III, 184, 436, 616; and IV, 29, 49, 166, and 428. During the decade next following 1765 42 Household Manufactures in the United States The definite effect of the policy of encouraging both the production of raw material and its manufacture into cloth- ing and household textile supplies, by the system of pre- miiuns, is somewhat diflScult to determine. The records show that bounties were actually paid/ Commenting on this point in connection with the production of hemp and flax, Giesecke says: "Furthermore, the importance of the domestic manufactures coupled with the fact that the spinning-wheel, the loom, and the hand card were found in most of the homes of the northern colonies gives us good evidence of the production of hemp and flax." Con- some legislative encouragements were given to manufacturing in the home and elsewhere. Maryland, in 1765, provided that each county court should pay out 8,000 pounds of tobacco anually in prize money for the best manu- factured pieces of linen {Laws of Md., 1787, c. 6, Session of 1765; cited by Giesecke, op. cit., p. 65). South Carolina, in 1770, provided, for a five-year term, a bounty of £30 for every hundred pounds' value of "good merchant- able linens and thread made in the province" (Cooper, op. cit., IV, 316). In 1775 the Provincial Council of North Carolina offered a bounty of £100 to the person who within twelve months produced to the Council 6 pieces of woolen cloth of twenty yards each, not less than three-quarters of a yard wide {Col. Rec. N.C., X, 218). In the same year the Council also offered a premium of £50 to the person who should first make 50 pairs of cotton cards of wire as good as the cards imported from England; also a like reward to the first person to make 100 pairs of wool cards of equal qual- ity {ibid., p. 217). Chowan County also provided for premiums this same year. Her Committee of Safety offered a reward of £10 to any person who within twelve months first produced 100 yards of well-fulled woolen cloth to the committee; also a bonus of £10 for 100 yards of weE-bleached Unen of a quality that usually cost 2s. sterling in Great Britain, and £5 for 100 yards of a quality that usually cost is. in Great Britain. All of the foregoing had to be made in the county {ibid., IX, 1142). Four persons claimed the bounty on linen, which was divided equally among them {ibid., X, 829). ■ See pp. 30, 3S; also Giesecke, op. cit., p. 63. Factors Afecting Household Manufactures 43 cerning the bounties on the cloth made from these products, the same author remarks: "In the northern colonies we find a greater degree and variety of household manufactures than in the southern coloriies, and this in part accounts for the comparatively numerous bounties in the former colonies for the manufacture of linen and sailcloth.'" So, whether household manufactures were a cause or a result of the bounties and premiums granted in the various colonies, it seems quite evident that there was a close connection between them. ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL CONDITIONS Whatever manufacturing was done in the homes and on the plantations before 1765 was done chiefly from necessity rather than desire. It was not until Parliament entered upon the policy of taxing the colonies that they began to plan quite deliberately and uniformly to supply themselves with the articles that they had formerly been glad to get from the mother-country. While England's restrictive policy was an important factor in bringing about this inclination, and the laws, made by the colonial assem- blies in attempting to encourage it, added legal sanction, yet, at the same time, certain economic conditions and, after 1765, political notions probably did more to promote family and plantation manufacturing than both the policy of England and that of the colonial assemblies. The chief economic conditions were : (i) a general decline in prices and the uncertainty of supplies just after 1640; (2) adequate or inadequate transportation facilities; (3) occupation of the ' Op. cit., pp. 63, 60. 44 Household Manufactures in the United States people; (4) staple crops; (5) fluctuations in the supply and price of tobacco; and (6) favorable or unfavorable balance of trade. After 1765 the political conditions were: the opposition to the Stamp Act and other taxing measures, and, above all, the Revolution itself, which forced upon the colonies as a whole the problem of supplying themselves very largely with what had before been coming from the outside world. The homes were in a large measure respon- sible for the clothing during these trying times. It is with these economic and political factors and their influence on household manufactures that this section deals. The results in New England of the great decline in immigration after 1640 caused those who had come up to this date to look elsewhere for the necessities of life that the English ships had been bringing them. This decline in immigration had two important effects: first, it cut off a regular supply of commodities that had been coming along with the settlers; and, secondly, it caused such a reduction in the quantity of commodities produced in New England that the people no longer had the means wherewith to supply themselves with clothing and other ne- cessities. Winthrop, writing of conditions about 1641, said: This [reform begun by Parliament in 1641] caused men to stay in England in expectation of a new world, so as few coming to us, all foreign commodities grew scarce, and our own of no price. Corn would buy nothing: A cow which cost last year £20 might now be bought for 4 or £5, etc These straits set our people on work to provide fish, clapboards, planks, etc., and to sow hemp and flax (which prospered very well), and to look out to the West Indies for a trade in cotton.' ' Hist. ofN. Eng. ("Orig. Nar. of Early Am. Hist." ed.), p. 31. Factors Ajffecting Household Manufactures 45 The effect of the decline in immigration on the price of cattle greatly inconvenienced the people who had been getting their supplies from the surplus of cattle which they sold to the newcomers at fancy prices. These conditions and inconveniences were admirably set forth by Hubbard/ when he wrote of the New England colony, about 1640, as follows: Hitherto divine Providence did, with Arms of abundant Good- ness, as a nursing father, uphold this infant Province of New England, as was said of Ephriam, when God learned him to go, taking him by the hand. But for the future they were left more to stand upon their own legs, and shift for themselves; for now there was a great change in the state of the country, the inhabitants being put to great straits by reason of the fall of the price of cattle, the breeding and increase of which had been the principal means of upholding the coimty next under divine favor, shuiing out upon them, by many unexpected advantages; for whereas before, all sorts of great cattle were usually sold for 25 £ the head, by reason of the continual coming over of new families every year to plant the wilderness, now that the fountain began to be dried, and the stream turned another way, and many that intended to have followed their neighbors and friends into a land not sown, hoping by the turn of the times and the great changes that were then afoot, to enjoy that at their own doors, which the others had travelled so far to seek abroad, there happened a total cessation of any passengers coming over; yea, rather as the turn of the tide, many came back with the help of the same stream that carried them thither; insomuch that now the Coimty of New Eng- land was to seek a way to provide themselves of clothing, which they could not attain by selling their cattle as before; which now were fallen from the huge price fore-mentioned, first to 14 £, and 10 £ an ' Hubbard was bom in 1621. He was a member of the first class of graduates of Harvard College, in 1642, and was for a long time the minister at Ipswich. His history was not published until 1815, when it was printed in the Mass. Hist. Soc. Colls. It was reprinted in 1848 by the same society. 46 Household Manufactures in the United States head, and presently after (at least, within a year) to s£ a piece; nor was their at that rate ready vent for them neither. Thus the flood that brought in much wealth to many persons, the contrary ebb carried all away, out of their reach. To help in this their exigent, besides the industry that the present necessity put particular persons upon, for the necessary supply of their families, the General Court made several orders for the manufacture of woollen and linen cloth; which, with God's blessing upon man's endeavor, in a little time stopped this gap in part, and soon after another door was opened by Special Providence. For when one hand was shut by way of supply from England, another was opened by way of traffic, first to the West Indies and Wine Islands, whereby among other goods much, cotton- wool was brought into the country from the Indies; which the inhabitants learned to spin, and breeding of sheep, and by sowing of hemp and flax, they soon found out a way to supply themselves with many necessaries of linen and woollen cloth.' So, whether the New Englanders desired it or not, the foregoing conditions, so well pictured by Hubbard, forced upon them the necessity of suppljdng themselves with many of the commodities which, prior to 1640, had come from the outside world. Since no textile manufacturing establishments were in existence at this early date, it was necessary to turn the homes into factories and to set the women and children to making clothing and household textile supplies, while the men made farming implements, household utensils, and other necessities.^ ' Gen. Hist, of N. Eng., in Mass. Hist. Soc. Colls., 2d ser., V, 238 &. "According to Johnson, economic conditions had become somewhat more favorable to the colonists by 1652. Concerning the state of affairs at this date he said: "For rayment, our cloth hath not been cut short, as but of late years the traders that way have increased to such a number, that their shops have continued full all the year long, all one England; besides the Lord hath been pleased to increase sheep extraordinarily of Factors Affecting Household Manufactures 47 As the colonies advanced both in population and in material prosperity, certain economic conditions developed which tended to keep them at the business of supplying themselves with the ordinary necessities of life. South of Pennsylvania, except Somerset County, Maryland, and the whole back-country, these conditions were the fluctuations in the price of their chief staples as well as the commodities they received from England. North of Maryland and the back-country in the South the conditions were more com- plex. They included an abundant supply of accessible raw material, lack of a staple to exchange for English goods, and inadequate transportation facilities. In 1728 William Keith in a letter to the Secretary of the Lords of Trade summarized the reasons for the people in this region making their own clothing as follows: (i) The principal products of the farm being stock and grain, it was profitable for every farmer to have a few sheep to run on the pasture, the wool from which was made into clothing during the winter season when there was nothing else to do. (2) Flax was easily raised and the coarse cloth made from it would do twice the service as the cloth of the same fineness from Europe. Hemp was also raised which was made into bags, plow traces, and halters which were better than those bought in shops. (3) The old women and children who late, hemp and flax here is great plenty, hides here are more for the number of persons than in England; and for cloth, here is and would be materials enough to make it; but the Farmers deem it better for their profit to put away their cattle and com for cloathing, than to set upon making cloth; if the Merchants trade be not kept on foot, they fear greatly their come and cattle will lye in their hands" {Wonder-Working Providence ["Orig. Nar. of Early Am. Hist." ed.], p. 211). 48 Household Manufactures in the United States could not work out of doors were given profitable employ- ment in carrying on family manufactures. (4) Grain being the chief product enabling them to buy European goods, the settlements in the back-country had no market for their grain, hence raised only enough for their own use, the remainder of their time being spent in making clothing and other supplies/ The people in the back-country and on the frontier, both in the northern and in the southern colonies, were greatly handicapped in the exchange of their commodities for supplies from the outside world by inadequate transporta- tion facilities. The plantations along the southern rivers, and the coast towns of the North, had the facilities to dis- pose of their products for English or other manufactures; but not so with the back-country and frontier peoples, who might drive a few cattle and hogs to market, send by pack- trains a few hides, beeswax, and whisky, but could not dispose of their grain and other bulky products of the farm. Conditions in western Virginia and Pennsylvania between 1763 and 1783 furnish an excellent example of home manu- facturing being forced upon a people because of their eco- nomic isolation. Since these communities had no market for their produce, it became necessary for each family to be^ come self-supporting in almost every particular. Hominy blocks and mills were in use in almost every household. The clothing was practically all of household manufacture. ' N.J. Archives, ist ser., V, 205. The Lords of Trade also gave similar reason in a report they made in 1728 to a committee of the Privy Council (ibid., p. 208). These reasons were repeated in 1733 in a report the Board of Trade made to the House of Lords ("Representation of the Board of Trade to the House of Lords," etc., Conn. Hist. Soc. Colls., V., App., 461). Factors Affecting Household Manufactures 49 Plows, harrows, sleds, cooper-ware, cedar-ware, and looms were likewise homemade. In fact, almost everything needed in eking out the good or bad living had to be made in the household, for there were at this time few persons who devoted all their time to any one of the mechanic arts.' The overstocking of the slave market led in turn to an overproduction of tobacco in Virginia and Maryland. When the price became so low that the planters could no longer exchange their crop for the necessary supplies, they were forced to make many of these on the plantation. In writing to the British Council of Trade in March, 1710-11, Governor Alexander Spotswood of Virginia called atten- tion to the fact that the recent increase in the production of tobacco disproportionate to the consumption had forced the people to diversify their industry. He said: This [the increase in production of tobacco] was felt in those parts of the Country where Tobacco is reputed mean, and the people being disappointed of the necessary supplies of Cloathing for their familys in return for their tobacco, found themselves under necessity of attempting to Cloath themselves with their own Manufactures. And the Market for Tobacco stiU declining and few stores of goods brought in, other parts of the Country, through the like necessity, ' Doddridge, Notes on the Settlements and Indian Wars oj the Western Farts of Va. and Pa., from a reprint in Kercheval's Hist, of the Valley of Va. (2d ed., 1850), p. 235. The conditions in North Carolina were much the same as those in Virginia and Pennsylvania. In speaking of them Saunders, in his prefatory notes to Vol. Ill of Col. Rec. N.C., says: "British Commod- ities, as they were called, were brought from Virginia by land or in canoes in small quantities at unreasonable rates, but the bulk of the cloth used in the country, whether cotton, linen, or woolen, was made at home, each plantation, or at least each neighborhood, supplying its own needs from its own products and its own labor, the housewives of the country being very proficient in such matters" (Introd., p. xv). so Household Manufactures in the United States have been forced into the same humour of planting Cotton and Sow- ing Flax, and by mixing the first with their wool to supply the wants of course Cloathing and Linen, not only for their Negros, but for many of the poorer sort of housekeepers. This is now become so universal that even in one of the best Countys for Tobacco, I'm credibly informed there has been made this last year above 40,000 yards of divers sorts of Woolen, Cotton and Linnen Cloth, and other Countys where tobacco is less valuable have no doubt advanced their manufactures proportionately. Tho' this be at present the General humor of the Country, it is introduced more by necessity than inclina- tion, and the people are so little skilled in this kind of Manufacture that they wUl with difficulty attain any tolerable perfection in it, and own that what they make now costs dearer than they usually had from England when their tobacco bore but a moderate price.' The people north of Maryland were considerably handi- capped during the entire colonial period because the balance of trade with Great Britain was continually against them.^ This situation was caused by the similarity of staple products of this section and those of England. Because of this similarity, as has already been shown,' the mother-country had shut out the staples' of this region ' "Letters of Governor Spotswood," Va. Hist. Colls., N.S., I, 72. " From 1697 to 1773, inclusive, there was not a single year in which New England did not have a large balance against her. In 1 7 7 1 this balance was £1,269,737. During the same time New York and Pennsylvania had a balance against them every year but one, 1697. This balance at times reached over half a million pounds annually in each of these colonies. On the other hand, Virginia and Maryland, most of the time,*had the balance in their favor. This was the case in aU but sixteen of the seventy-two years after 1696. The same is true of the Carolinas. From 1732 to 1773 the balance was against Georgia all the time except ten years, nine of these after 1754 (Whitworth, State of the Trade of Great Britain, i6gj-iTj3, PP- S3> 54, 63-70, 78). 3 See above, p. 17. Factors A feeling Household Manufactures 51 by high duties. To mitigate this condition of aiiairs the New England and middle colonies were forced to transfer their products to Barbados and Jamaica, to South of Europe and to Africa, in order to secure a medium of exchange for clothing, furniture, utensils, tools, implements, and other manufactured commodities from England.' This was not true of the southern colonies. Virginia's and Maryland's tobacco. North Carolina's naval stores, and South Carolina's and Georgia's rice and indigo, which could all go directly to England, succeeded in keeping the balance of trade between them and the mother-country in their favor. This situation made it easier for the South (back-country excepted) to live on agriculture alone, while the North finally saw that before agriculture and commerce could exert their best economic force, they must have manufacturing combined with them. With the large bal- ance of trade against them, the people north of Maryland " The following table gives an idea of the amount of this trade: TOTAL EXPORTS OF THE COLONIES FOR THE YEAR 1769 Colonies To Great To Soutli of To West Britain Europe Indies £ £ £ 142,755 81,173 208,426 113,382 50,88s 68,8ss 28,112 203,752 178,331 759,961 140,190 91,249 405,014 76,119 87,758 82,270 6x4 13,28s To Africa New England New York and New Jersey. . Pennsylvania Maryland and Virginia North Carolina and ^outh Carolina Georgia ^. £ 17,711 1,313 560 690 Of the total exports (£450,065) from New England, but £142,755 went to Great Britain; and of a total of £410,755 from Pennsylvania, but £28,112. In the South the opposite was true. Of a total of £991,400 from Virginia and Maryland, £759,961 went to Great Britain. This clarifies the point made in the foregoing paragraph (Macpherson, op. cit., m, 572). 52 Household Manufactures in the. United States were forced to turn upon themselves and seek an industry to combine with their agriculture and commerce. This industry was manufacturing, which was carried on both in and out of the homes. Up to about 1763 the household manufacturing that had been going on in the colonies was more or less local, induced and sustained by the factors considered above. From this date to and including the Revolution itself events occurred in rapid succession which tended both to generalize the custom and to increase the quantity that had heretofore been made. These events were the taxing measures enacted by Parliament and the retaliatory means used by the various colonies and the Continental Congress. The act providing for the strict enforcement of the naviga- tion and customs laws in America, the renewal of the Sugar Act of 1733, with the addition of coffee, Spanish and Portuguese wines, and other less important articles, and the Stamp and the Townshend acts, were the unexpected stimuli of a general movement toward household manu- factures. This movement was popularized and sustained by the non-importation, non-consumption, and non- exportation agreements and associations formed in the separate colonies and adopted by the First Continental Congress. How all of these worked themselves out in generalizing the custom and increasing the amount of goods made in the homes and on the plantations is the theme of the next few paragraphs. Until the attempted enforcement of the Grenville policy the colonies had offered little resistance to the right of England to regulate their commerce. But beginning with Factors Affecting Household Manufactures 53 the announcement of this pohcy stubborn opposition developed, first by amicable means, later by bellicose. In 1765 the merchants of New York, Rhode Island, Massa- chusetts, and Pennsylvania entered into what they called non-importation agreements. They agreed among them- selves not to import any goods from Great Britain, to countermand orders already given, and to refuse to sell goods sent on commission until the Stamp Act was re- pealed. These resolutions began in New York and were soon adopted in the other colonies named. The people also in large numbers agreed to wear nothing but goods of domestic manufacture. In November, 1764, a society for the promotion of arts, agriculture, and economy was formed in New York. Rewards for the production of both raw materials and finished goods were offered by this society. In 1765 prizes ranging from £30 to £10 were announced for the five largest quantities of linen yarn spirn under the direction of one person; for Hnen cloth, in like manner, five premiums, ranging from £25 to £5; for woven stock- ings, £16 to £12; and smaller amounts for shoes, dressed deerskins for breeches, and beaver skins for gloves; for the greatest quantity of flax raised by one farmer from £30 to £10; and from £15 to £5 for the greatest quantity on one acre. Gratuities were also offered in 1766 similar to the foregoing.' To lessen the inconveniences caused by the non-importation resolutions, a fair was opened in New York City in 1765 for the sale of home manufactures. To wear silks and broadcloths was accounted a disgrace, and the wealthiest and most fashionable appeared clad ' Bishop, op. cit., I, 368 f. 54 Household Manufactures in the United States in homespun linsey-woolsey.' The people then for the first time began to appreciate the internal resources of their country— a lesson they did not soon forget. The king signed the bill that repealed the Stamp Act in March, 1766. This exultant victory of the colonies, however, was of short duration, for the very next year came the Townshend acts, which called forth non-importation agreements similar to those of 1765. That these agree- ments really existed even among the consumers is shown by a letter from a gentleman who was returning to Philadelphia from a visit in Virginia. The letter was written to a gentleman in this city and printed in the Pennsylvania Journal, April 20, 1769. In speaking of the revenue act, dissolving the assemblies, etc., the writer said: These things have blown up the minds of the people into a high flame for industry all over the counties, so that several townships as I came along were resolving speedily to meet and enter into strict agreements against buying any more English goods, especially their woolen, silk and callico fineries, but each family vigorously to set about to manufacturing their own cloathing, and every other neces- sary article At another gentleman's house where I was, his lady was spinning fast, and had five clever girls spinning along with her ever since they heard that the Boston Parliament was dissolved; it's expected that they will soon have a good deal of cloth to sell.* The making and wearing of homemade clothes at this date became a social as well as an industrial custom. In 1769 the president and the first graduating class of Brown ' Booth, Bist. of the City of N.Y., p. 424. ' "Newspaper Extracts," VII, 1768-69, p. 420, in N.J. Archiiies, ist ser., XXVI. Factors Ajffecting Household Manufactures 55 University appeared at the Commencement exercises in garments made of wool grown in Rhode Island. The Harvard graduates followed their example the next year.' Women in all the colonies became members of societies resolving to forego luxuries and to spin, card, and wear clothing of their own make. A suit of homespun became a mark of popular distinction.^ Rhode Island was a leader in both the social and the industrial phases of this move- ment. The "Daughters of Liberty" held an all-day session in Providence. Commenting on what was done in Newport, the New York Journal of May 30, 1768, said: What a glorious example Newport has set us. Rouse, O, my Countrymen! We are well informed that one married lady and her daughter of about sixteen, have spun full sixty yards of good fine linen cloth, nearly a yard wide, since the first of March, besides taking care of a large family. The linen manufacture is promoted and carried on, with so much spirit and assiduity, among all ranks, that we are assured there is scarcely enough flax to be had in town, to supply the continued Consiunption of that Article.' That the people of New England, New York, and Pennsylvania really meant what they said in the non- importation agreements is shown by a glance at the amount of imports for the years 1768 and 1769 (Table I). The figures also bring out the fact that the "boycott" was not very effective in the southern colonies. A falling off in the imports into the northern colonies of more than £900,000 is certainly evidence that the people 'North, "The New England Wool Manufactures," The N. Eng. States, I, 194. " Simms, Hist, of Schoharie Co., N.Y., p. 175. ' Quoted by Paterson, Hist, of R.I., p. iii. 56 Household Manufactures in the United States were much in earnest. The uniform increase in the impor- tations into the South during the same time shows that this section was not at this time willing to make the leap into economic darkness. Their sources of home supply were not at this time so adequate as were those of their northern neighbors. TABLE I Value of Imports from Great Britain* Colonies Christmas, 1767 to Cliristmas, 1768 Christmas, 1768, to Christmas J 1769 Difference New England New York Pennsylvania Maryland and Virginia North Carolina and South Caro- lina Georgia £ 419.797 482,930 432,107 475,954 289,868 56,562 £ 207,993 74,918 199,909 488,362 306,600 58,340 £ — 211,804 —408,012 -232,198 -)- 12,408 + 16,732 + 1,778 * Whitworth, State oj Trade oj Great Britain^ pp. 72, 73. Shillings and pence omitted in all cases. To make the non-importation and non-exportation agreements generally effective required but the action of the Continental Congress. One of the most important acts of this body was the adoption of the "Association," which included an agreement to import no English products after December i, 1774, and to export nothing to any British port, European or colonial, after September 10, 1775.' This "Association" was readily ratified in all the colonies except New York and Georgia. In the former, however, there were enough Whigs to secure its general observance through the work of their local committees. Tables II and ' Jour. Cont. Cong. (L.C. ed.), I, 75 S- Factors Afecting Household Manufactures 57 III show the effectiveness of the "Association" as enforced by the local committees in all the colonies except Georgia, the first revealing the effect on woolen goods imported into the colonies from England and the second exhibiting the total imports from and exports to Great Britain a few years before the outbreak of the Revolution. TABLE II Value of Woolen Goods of All Sorts Exported from England to the Colonies* Colonies 1772 1773 1774 I77S New England New York Pennsylvania Maryland and Virginia Norfli Carolina and South Carolina Georgia £ 284,553 128,879 216,055 185,437 84,226 26,492 £ 147,717 76,498 135,119 99,308 73,403 16,982 £ 168,815 129,547 217,205 133,912 91,361 14,627 £ 8,382 345 10 5 1,106 39,719 * Macpherson, op. cit., HI, 602. Shillings and pence omitted in all cases. These tables (II and III) reveal the fact that the colonies "boycotted" not only woolen goods from England but all others as well. They also show the general effectiveness of the non-importation and non-exportation agreements, the former assisting to make the imports in all the colonies except Georgia practically negligible before the end of the year 1775, the latter affecting exports similarly the next year. Conditions remained thus, especially in the northern section, except New York, to the end of the Revolution.' Supplies of all sorts had either to be made in the country, captured on the high seas, or acquired from countries ' See Table IV. S8 Household Manufactures in the United States other than England at the risk of capture. All these methods were used — ^just to what extent it is difficult to determine. The Revolutionary War was the climax of all the forces tending to throw the colonists upon their own resources to acquire the necessities of life. What had been going on in the ba^k-country of the South and in most of the northern TABLE III Official Value of the Exports and Imports op the Colonies to and FROM Great Britain, Christmas, 1773, to Christmas, 1776* Christmas, 1773, to Chkistuas, 1774 Chbisimas, 1774, TO Chilistuas, 1775 Christmas, 177s, 10 Christmas, 1776 Exports Imports Exports Imports Exports Imports New England. . . New York Pennsylvania. . . Maryland and Virginia North Carolina and South Car- olina Georgia £ 172,248 80,008 69,611 612,030 432,302 67,647 £ 562,476 437,937 625,652 528,738 378,116 57,518 £ 116,588 187,018 175,966 758,356 579,549 103,477 £ 71,625 1,228 1,366 1,921 6,245 113,777 £ 762 2,318 1,421 73,226 13,688 12,569 £ 55,050 ■■■■365' * Macpherson, op. cit.f III, 564, 585, sgg. Shillings and pence omitted in every case. section was now forced upon the towns on the coast and the plantations along the rivers. No longer could the English ships come to the plantations laden with all sorts of luxuries and necessities to exchange for their tobacco, rice, and indigo. The table of imports from Great Britain during the years of the Revolution shows how completely the supply from this section was cut off from most of the colonies (Table IV). Factors Affecting Household Manufactures 59 Four significant facts are revealed by Table IV. They are: first, the complete cutting off of the trade between Great Britain and New England, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia during the war; second, the success of the New York towns in securing supplies during all of the seven years; third, the renewal of the trade relations with TABLE IV Imports from Great Britain* Colonies Christ- mas, 1776. to Christ- mas, 1777 Christ- mas, 1777. to Christ- mas, 177S Christ- mas, 1778, to Christ- mas, 1779 Christ- mas, 1779, to Christ- mas, 1780 Christ- mas, 1780, to Christ-, mas, 178Z Christ- mas, 1781, to Christ- mas, 1782 uChrist- *mas, 1782, to Christ- mas, Z783 New England. New York. . . Pennsylvania. Maryland and Virginia North Carolina and South Carolina. . Georgia £ 57,294 26,449 7,537 349,917 496,602 502,977 186,242 8S 236,940 91,888 330,847 14,058 69,742 339 £ 199,558 547,132 239,462 199,657 226,736 22,682 * Macpherson, op, cit., HI, 614, 63a, 651, 673, 706, 727; IV, 40. Shillings and pence omitted in all cases. the Carolinas and Georgia during the years that this sec- tion was occupied by the British armies; and, finally, the anxiety of the whole country to return to English goods after the war was practically over, this anxiety being evidenced by the heavy importations in 1782-83. The clothing for the family and the general supplies for the household, like bedding, table linen, etc., during these years was made mainly by the women in the homes. Macy's picture of conditions on Nantucket Island, and 6o Household Manufactures in the United States Jefferson's statement of what was done in Virginia, are typical of what was going on throughout the North and South as a whole during the war. Of Nantucket Island, the former said: The suffering for clothing was inconsiderable throughout the war. For immediately, on being cut off from the use of English manufac- tures, the women engaged within their own families in manufacturing of various kinds of cloth for domestic use. They thus kept their household decently clad, and the surplus of their labors they sold to such as chose to buy rather than make for themselves. In this way the female part of families, by their industry and strict economy, frequently supported the whole domestic circle; evincing the strength of their attachment and the value of their service to those on whom they themselves were wont to depend for protection and support. There being from twelve to sixteen thousand sheep owned on the island, it was easy to procure as much wool as was needed. A con- siderable quantity of flax was raised yearly and some was imported from the continent; so that means were furnished for all that were inclined to labor, to clothe their families.' Jefferson pictured the conditions in Virginia as follows: We never had an interior trade of any importance. Our exterior commerce has suffered very much from the beginning of the present conflict. During this time we have manufactured within our families the most necessary articles of cloathing. Those of Cotton will bear some comparison with the same kinds of manufactures in Europe; but those of wool, flax, and hemp are very coarse, unsightly, and unpleasant.^ The discussion in the succeeding chapter will show that these statements were not overdrawn and that all the fore- going factors materially affected the amount of manufac- turing done in the homes and on the plantations. ' Hist, of Nantucket, p. no. ' Notes on Va., p. 273. CHAPTER III THE STATUS OF HOUSEHOLD MANUFACTURES IN THE COLONIES The rather extended discussion of the factors affecting the rise and progress of household manufactures during the colonial era presented in the preceding chapter has demonstrated the fact that influences tending to increase the output of the home factory in one part of the country had the opposite effect in another — ^just how much and how little it is difi&cult to determine because definite statistics on this phase of colonial life seem never to have been collected. To determine in statistical form the extent and amount of all kinds of articles manufactured in the homes and on the plantations prior to 1783 is not possible from the meager records that have come down to us from this period. But with the scant and scattering accounts that are now accessible one can formulate in a somewhat general fashion a statement of the status of such manu- factures during the settlement and progress of the colonies until their complete separation from the mother-country. It is the purpose of this chapter to formulate such a statement. SEVENTEENTH-CENXURY BEGINNINGS Little attention was given to any sort of manufacturing in New England prior to 1640. During these years of beginnings the people were content to engage principally 61 62 Household Manufactures in the United States in fanning, lumbering, fishing, and cattle-raising. So long as the ships came from, and returned to, England with considerable regularity, as they did between 1630 and 1640, necessary articles of clothing and other supplies could be secured from the mother-country. But on the assembling of the Long Parliament, as has been pointed out in the preceding chapter,' there occurred a great falling off in the immigration to this section, and at the same time a discontinuance of the regular supply of necessities that had been coming along with the ships that brought the settlers. Out of these conditions arose the serious problem of furnish- ing some twenty-four thousand people,' then in New Eng- land, with suitable clothing and other supplies needed in a region of long and severe winters. The decline in immi- gration mentioned above further complicated the situation by causing a corresponding diminution in the price of what those who had come over had to sell, thus making it very difficult for them to acquire the means of exchange for the few goods that were imported.' The graveness of the economic situation in which these northern colonists found themselves in 1640 was soon realized by the lawmakers, who attempted to mitigate the conditions then confronting the people by legislative enact- ment, the Massachusetts and Connecticut laws* of 1640 and 1642 being direct products of the foregoing uncontrol- ' See p. 44. ^ Based on Dexter's estimates, Proc. Am. Ant. Soc, N.S., V, 23, 2$, 29i 31- ' See chapter ii for a full treatment of these factors. * See pp. 29 f. for a full discussion of both of the laws. Status of Household Manufactures 63 lable circumstances. The effect of these laws is difficult to determine definitely. It is known from the records that people did apply for the premiums, and that the bounty law was repealed because it proved to be too much of a burden on the people, a fact affording some evidence of the effectiveness of such legislation.' Some spinning and weaving had been done in New England even before the lawmakers took up the problem of encouraging these industries. According to Palfrey, thread and yam were spun by women in their homes prior to 1640.* The author of New England's First Fruits, com- menting on the prosperity of the colony at about the same date, said, in enumerating the ways in which God had prospered them: In prospering hempe and flaxe so well, that its frequently sowen, spun and woven into linnen cloth; (and in a short time may serve for cordate) and so with cotton-wooU which we may have at very reasonable rates from the (islands) and our linnen Yarne, we can make dimittees and fustians for our summer clothing. And having a matter of 1,000 sheep, which prosper well, to begin withaU, in a competent time we hope to have woollen doath there made. And great and small cattel, being now very frequently killed for food; their skins will afEord.us leather for boots and shoes, and other uses: So that God is leading us by the hand into a way of clothing.^ This statement of a contemporary writer indicates that in reality little had been done before 1640 in the way of spinning yarn and weaving cloth. There is also an inti- mation in the latter part of the quotation that the skins of " See p. 30. ' Hist, of N. Eng. (Boston, 1892), II, 53. 5 Reprint in Mass. Hist. Soc. Colls., ist ser., I, 247 (first published in London in 1643). 64 Household Manufactures in the United States the cattle had been little utilized in the making of boots and shoes prior to this date. One might properly ask here, Whence came the knowl- edge of the arts of spinning and weaving required to make even the small amount of cloth that was probably made at such an early date ? To answer this query one has but to recall the fact that the settlers were from a country that had but recently passed out of the family stage of manu- facturing. In truth, during much of the seventeenth century the practice of spinning and weaving in the homes was quite common over all of rural England. Commenting on this point, Rogers remarked: It must not be forgotten, however, that in many places spinning and weaving were a bye-product in English industry, and that they were generally and assiduously practiced. The spinning wheel and the weaver's frame were I am certain common all over rural England not only in the seventeenth century, but during a consider- able part of the eighteenth also. Home-spun was the clothing of many peasants and workmen, and in the interpretation of the manner in which wages were exchanged for laborer's needs, we must take into accoimt that not a little of his clothing was the work of himself and his family after his agricultural or other labors were ended.' With such conditions existing in rural England at the time of the great migration to New England between 1630 and 1640, it is quite possible that among the immigrants there were many of both sexes well skilled in the arts of spinning and weaving. In fact, among those who came over in the "Mayflower" were a wool-carder, a silk-maker, and a fustian-maker. Another wool-carder came in 162 1 in the "Fortune"; and a silk-maker and a wool-carder ' Hist, oj Agr. and Prices in Eng., V, 587. Status of Household Manufactures 65 were among those who came in 1623 in the "Ann" and the "Little James."' Furthermore, among these early settlers were some Yorkshire weavers, who settled about six miles from Ipswich, Massachusetts, calling the place Rowley. In a very short time they were busy at their former trade, weaving; and in 1642 one John Pearson from Lynn set up among them the first fulling-mill in this country.^ It was these people who, according to Winthrop, exceeded all others as early as 1643 in the spinning and weaving operations. The legislation concerning spinning and weaving dis- cussed in the previous chapter makes it clear that the lawmakers did not intend that the knowledge of these arts should pass away with the first generation. While all these laws affected directly or indirectly the amount of manufacturing done in the home, the one of 1656 seems to have touched the subject more closely than any other single one. By assessing each family with one spiimer, and requiring this spinner to spin for thirty weeks each year at the rate of three pounds of cotton, linen, or woolen yarn a week, under penalty of i2d. for every pound short,^ the responsibility of supplying yarn for the looms was placed upon the individual homes. Just how generally this respon- sibility was assumed by the homes during the seventeenth century in New England is quite difl&cult to determine. One writer states that there was not at the beginning of the eighteenth century one family in forty in Essex ' The Hist. Mag., ist ser., Ill, 262. ' Brown (editor), Textile Industries in the U.S., I, 127. 3 See p. 33 for the law. 66 Household Manufactures in the United States County, Massachusetts, that did not spin and weave the doth for its own clothing/ It is quite true that the seven- teenth century in New England was in reality the age of homespun industries. The spinning-wheel, the loom, and the dyepot were in practically every farmer's kitchen.^ Most of the tailoring and the dressmaking and much of the hatmaking and shoemaking were done by members of the household. Linsey-woolsey was the commonest fabric. Tow cloth was made into towels and other coarse goods. Cotton came into use quite early and was spun on the large wheel. Checked and striped goods were manufactured, and when in excess of the household needs were exchanged for calico and silk. The goods bartered by the industrious women were bunting, serges, druggets, brooms, hats, and cotton and linen goods.* ' PhUbrick, "Spinning in the Olden Time," Essex Antiquarian, I, 88. ' Weeden, Econ. and Soc. Hist, of N. Eng., I, 305. 3 An example of this bartering is the following itemized statement of the articles credited to Mrs. Mary Avery during the years 1685-89, by a Boston storekeeper (from an old account-book of a Boston shopkeeper now in the MSS collection of the Boston Public Library; cited by Abbott, Women in Industry, p. 24): By 2 yard i of buntin att ? ? ? By yard J ditto att i^d £0 3^. 3d, By 3 yard i of half tiuck £ersey att 35. 3(2 o 10 6 A coverlid 100 _ By 16 yards of drugget att — and a broom sd 117 7 ' By 20 yards black searge at 45. 6c2 4 10 o By 20 yards searge a.t 3s. 6d 3 3 4 By 3 yds. buntin at 3(f o 3 3 By i8i yds. searge at 3/8 3 7 10 By a hatt 5-6 o s 6 By S3 yds. of cotton and linnin at 2-9 7 S 9 By I doz. ? a carpett 30 214 o By 7 hatts att s-sd i 16 9 By 4 yds. searge att ? 2 4 o By ditto at ? i 10 o By 4 yds. black searge o i8 o By searge 819 4J By 34 yds. Searge at 3s. 6i 67 6 By 24 yds. searge at ? 6 o o Status of Household Manufactures 67 The status of household manufactures during the seven- teenth century was much the same in the middle colonies as it was in New England. In fact, in all the territory north of Maryland conditions were very similar in respect to this important industry, because this region produced practically the same staples, thus making the trade relations with the mother-country very similar. This similarity was more striking after all the territory came under the control of the EngHsh. A few refer- ences to actual conditions will substantiate this general statement. Holland and England assumed a similar attitude toward their colonies in regard to textile manufactures. Rule XXIX of the Freedom and Exemption granted by the West Indian Company to all patrons, masters, or private persons who should plant colonies in New Netherlands read as follows: "The colonists shaU not be permitted to make any woolen, linen, or cotton cloth, nor weave there, on pain of being banished, and being arbitrarily punished as per- jurers."^ This rule, on its face, was more inclusive and arbitrary than any law ever passed by the English on the same subject. But, in spite of its arbitrary nature, the Dutch seem to have regarded it rather lightly, for spinning- wheels and looms were very common among them during the early history of New Netherlands. On these the women and girls expended their leisure moments, pro- ducing piles and piles of homespun cloth and snow-white linen.^ ' O'Callaghan, Laws and Ordinances of New Netherlands, p. 10. ' Booth, op. cit., p. 186; Clute, Annals of Staten Island, pp. 77 f. 68 Household Manufactures in the United States The passing of New Netherlands from Dutch to English control seems to have had no diminishing effect on the output of the family factory. Of the people of New York six years after the territory passed under the control of the English, Denton said: "For the manner how they get a livelihood, it is principally by Corn and Cattel, which will there fetch them any Commodities; likewise they sowe store of Flax, which they make every one Cloth of for their own wearing, as also woollen Cloth, and Linsey-woolsey, and had they more Tradesmen among them, they would in a little time live without the help of any other Countrey for their Clothing."^ The historian of Rye, Westchester County, asserts that the wearing apparel about 1684 was mostly of family manufacture. Leather garments were very common, the skins of the deer, raccoon, fox, wolf, and beaver being much used. "Every house possessed a loom; a shop for weaving, frequently built of stone, would be found on nearly every farm."^ While such statements portray conditions in general, yet it should be said that by the end of the century, especially in the older settlements, "each well-to-do man owned a suit of clothes, and perhaps a trooper's coat, made of imported cloth."' These suits often lasted for years, and were handed down from father to son, from generation to generation. However, the fact •remains that most of the common wearing apparel and the ' A Brief Description of New York, Formerly Called New Netherlands, p. 58 (reprint from the original edition of 1670). = Baird, Hist, of Rye, Westchester Co., N.Y., p. 129; see Weise, The Hist, of Albany, N.Y., pp. 186 f., for a similar statement of conditions in Albany in 1685. 3 Cravens, Hist, of MatUtuck, L.I., p. 76. Status of Household Manufactures 69 necessary household fabrics were homemade and remained so for nearly another century.' Conditions similar to those in New York during the early stages of its history existed in the other middle colonies. In 1663 there were eighty sheep in New Sweden. The people made enough linen and woolen cloth to supple- ment their furs and give them bed and table linen. They also tanned their own leather and made their own boots and shoes — when they wore any. All well-to-do families had a good store of linen for bedclothes, and other textile household necessities. The washing was not done often, hence it was necessary to have the chests of drawers well filled with homespun. The ox-yokes had bows made of bent hickory wood; for horses' traces the people used twisted deerskin; plaited corn husks served for collars; and the rest of the harness was homemade of the same or similar serviceable materials.'' In New Jersey conditions were similar to those in Delaware. A contemporary writer, speaking of the products of this colony in 1681, concluded as follows: "The Country also produces Flax and Hemp, which they already Spin and Manufacture into Linnen: They make severaly Stuffs and Cloath of Wool for Apparel: ■ At the end of the seventeenth century the trades in the interior were seldom sufficiently differentiated for one to live by one of them wholly. To eke out a Uving in these early days one had to have a farm. In 1700 Mattituck, Long Island, had 100 residents; among them were black- smiths, carpenters, masons, joiners, coopers, wheelwrights, cordwainers, shoemakers, saddlers, fullers, tailors, tanners, and millers. These men carried on their trades as an adjunct to their farming activities (ibid., p. 80). ' Scharf and Westcott, Hist, of Phila., I, 136, 140, 151. 70 Household Manufactures in the United States They Tan Leather Make Shoes and Hats.'" These manu- factures were introduced by Quakers from Yorkshire and London, who settled Salem and Burlington in 1678. They made serges, druggets, crapes, good plushes, and several varieties of linen goods. Some Scotch immigrants also came to West Jersey before 1684, among whom during these early days were always found the cultivation and home manufacture of hemp and flax." As has been pointed out in the previous chapter,' the colonies south of Pennsylvania had much less occasion for reverting to the primitive modes of supplying the neces- sities of life than did their northern neighbors. Generally speaking, these southern colonies, except Virginia and a part of Maryland at times, never gave the mother-country much concern in the working out of her commercial policy. The production of tobacco, rice, and indigo chiefly engaged the energy and capital of the settlers from the Chesapeake southward. They were satisfied to exchange these staples for British goods rather than manufacture such commodities in their homes. The exceptions in Virginia and Maryland ' "The Present State of the Colony of West Jersey, in America, Sep- tember, Anno. Dom. 1681," Pa. Mag. of Hist., XVIII, 158 f. ' Raum, The Hist, of N.J., II, 351. What one man was thinking con- cerning spinning is reflected in Thomas Budd's Good Order Established in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, printed in 1685. This writer proposed the establishment of spinning schools, similar to those then existing in Germany, for these two colonies. He wished to have such schools in the principal cities and towns and oblige the parents by law to put their children in these schools. He felt that by such an arrangement these two colonies could soon be making enough Unen for their own use, with some to export to other colonies. 3 See p. SI. Status of Household Manufactures 71 were largely confined to communities where dependence was almost entirely upon tobacco, which they exported to England and in exchange received English manufactures equal to their demands, except in certain years when the supply was meager, or the price low, or some disturbance of trade prevented their getting it to market. As early as 1689 traders to Virginia and Maryland asserted that these provinces depended on them wholly for clothing and other necessaries from England/ Lists of the goods sent from the mother-country to these two colonies show that, not only necessities, but aU sorts of luxuries were handled by these traders. For example, from Christmas, 1698, to the same date in 1699, they imported from England 189 articles of English manufacture and 215 of foreign.' These lists included practically every product, both raw and manufactured, then known to the civilized world. Inven- tories of the possessions of both rich and poor show that there was much variation in both the character and the extent of these English and foreign manufactures. They ranged all the way from expensive luxuries to the com- monest necessities, and were widely distributed throughout the provinces.^ While Virginia and Maryland depended almost wholly upon England for their manufactured goods, yet there were times when the supply was not equal to the demand. This often inadequate supply was due to the fact that the amount of tobacco they exported to England varied greatly from year to year. On this account the Enghsh merchants ' Morriss, Col. Trade of Md., p. 58. ' Ibid., App., II, 139 S. 3 iiM., pp. 60 £f. 72 Household Manufactures in the United States hesitated to send large quantities of domestic and foreign goods to them, which in the event of a bad crop or a low price might be left on their hands. Morriss asserts that in average years the supply seemed inadequate to meet the needs of the inhabitants, and that in bad years it fell far below the average requisite amount.' This uncertain and insufl&cient supply of needful articles forced the planters of both of these colonies to manufacture on their plantations a sufficient quantity of the necessities to make up the short- age from England. Thus, during the years when imports were extremely scarce, there developed on the individual plantations considerable activity in the fabrication of cot- ton, linen, and woolen cloth for clothing, as well as house- hold linens and general supplies. This form of activity was purely of a household and plantation nature, as it was not carried on in any center. There is evidence that as early as 1649 plantation manu- facturing was carried on in the Virginia colony. It was said at this time of Captain Mathews, who resided on Blunt Point on the Lower James, that he had a fine house and all things answerable to it; that he sowed yearly a store of hemp and flax and caused it to be spun; that he kept weavers, and had a tan-house; caused leather to be dressed and made into shoes; and that he had eight shoe- makers employed in their trade and forty negro servants whom he brought up to the trades in his home.^ Of the ' Morriss, Col. Trade of Md., p. 64. ' "A Perfect Description of Virginia," Force, Tracts, II, No. 8, p. 15. Mathews' custom of bringing up his negroes to the trades was not an exceptional case. This seems to have been rather common before 1700. Status of Household Manufactures 73 people as a whole it was asserted that they had three thou- sand sheep, six public brew-houses, but most people brewed their own beer; and that they produced much hemp and flax, in spite of the fact that ships at this time were bringing in linen and woolen cloth of all sorts, as well as stockings and shoes.' From these two statements one infers that on some plantations manufacturing was carried on regardless of the quantity of supplies from England. And such was the case, especially in counties farthest removed from the British sources of supply; and such continued to be the case during the remainder of the seventeenth century. Some evidence of this is found in the inventories of the period. Wise, who examined many of these in the counties of the Eastern Shore, found frequent mention of woolen wheels, wool cards, and looms. That of William Taylor, who died about 1690, included thirty-five yards of Virginia cloth, which had been manufactured on his plantation.^ After examining many inventories covering the same period in other counties, Bruce remarks: "So numerous are refer- ences to linen-wheels in this interval, that it would be impossible to give a full list of them In one Commenting on this point, Bruce says: "The wills of the seventeenth century on record in the county courts indicate that there were many negroes, more especially of the female sex, who had been carefully educated to take part in domestic manufactures. After the cloth had been made, it was converted into suits either by the slaves or by the servants." Bruce also refers to a letter of William Byrd, March 8, 1685, to his correspondent in England, in which mention is made of the rivalry among his dependents as to who spin the most cotton {Econ. Hist, of Va. in the 17th Cent., II, 460, 471). ' "A Perfect Description of Virgiaia," Force, op. cit., pp. 3, 5. ' Eastern Shore of Va., p. 303. 74 Household Manufactures in the United States inventory, the Osborne, eighteen will be found included among the items of property belonging to the estate.'" The legislation in Virginia and Maryland during the seventeenth century and the response to it are indicative of the straits to which these colonies were put at times for necessary supplies. The effects of this legislation are partly revealed by the county records, which show that premiums were actually awarded xmder the acts encour- aging the manufacture of clothing and household fabrics. Ralph Wormeley, Christopher Wormeley, Captain Henry Creyk, John Farrell, and Richard Parrott, all of Middlesex County, Virginia, claimed rewards in 1684. The claim of each individual in the order named was for 14, 95, 61, 35, and 34 yards of cloth.^ In 1694 the York County Court ordered bounties paid to Thomas Chrisman and Thomas Fowler for cloth made in their homes by members of their families. Similar gratuities were awarded John Smith, of Middlesex County, and Thomas Cocke, of Henrico, the following year. Tobias Hall, of Lancaster County, was awarded premiums in 1697 and 1698.' Thus it becomes clear that the legislation was reaUy a factor in promoting, encouraging, and sustaining a certain type of manufactur- ing in the homes and on the plantations. After the Wool Act of 1699,'' the influence of this factor ceased, and the main- taining of whatever beginnings that had been made up to this date was left to the operators of the household factory.* ' Op. cit., p. 458, note. » Ibid., p. 459. " Ibid., II, 463. 4 Cf. p. 25. s The Carolinas were settled so late in the century that it seems best to omit them in this connection. Status of Household Manufactures 75 PROGRESS AFTER 170O From 1700 to about 1766 is a well-marked period in the history of household manufactures in the colonies. During all these years, on the basis of the interest in, and the amount of, manufacturing done in the homes, two well- defined geographic divisions existed. These were the territory north of Maryland and that south of Pennsyl- vania, except the back-country in the South, which, during most of the period, was simply a projection of Pennsyl- vania; and Somerset County, Maryland, which was inhabited largely by Scotch-Irish. Conditions in each of these large divisions, thus designated, were so similar to about 1766 that one scarcely needs to specify the exact locality when speaking of household manufactures in either of them. The northern district, including the foregoing exceptions in the South, was often characterized as a region where the people were in the habit of manufacturing in their homes clothing and household fabrics for their own families,' while the southern section never gave the mother- country much concern as an industrial competitor. As hinted above, manufacturing in the homes and on the plantations in this region was practiced mainly when the exigencies of the times forced it upon the people.^ Of that division composed of the territory north of Maryland and the exceptions noted. New England was ' "Reports of the Lords of Trade and Plantation on the Condition of the Colonies in February, 1731/32," quoted by Macpherson, Annals of Commerce, III, 187. ' The effects of England's mercantile system and the economic condi- tions in these sections have been considered in chapter i, and should be recalled in this connection. 76 Household Manufactures in the United States certainly the acknowledged leader in household manu- facturing. Before 1766 this domestic industry had become so incorporated into the habits of the people of this region that its industrial importance escaped much special notice. Weeden thinks that written testimony does not indicate the large amount of homemade goods really produced by this diffused industry during the greater part of the eight- eenth century.^ The town histories, inventories, and re- ports on conditions at various times give some idea of the amount; but at best only rough estimates can be made from sources of such a general nature. Yet, in the absence of more explicit data, one is obliged to rely upon such material for a statement of the extent and amount of the articles manufactured in the family way in the various sections of the country at different times throughout much of the colonial period. The effects of England's restrictive legislation began to be seen and felt in New England soon after the Wool Act of 1699. These effects were noted in the occasional reports of the king's officers in the colonies to the Board of Trade. In 1704 Brenton, the surveyor of customs in New England, reported that in a recent journey he made it his business to inform himself on the subject of sheep-raising, and found that in some towns where formerly there were not one hundred sheep kept, there would shortly be a thousand. He also found that Nantucket, Martha's Vine- yard, and other adjacent islands which once supplied neighboring towns with wool were working up their own supply for wearing apparel in much greater quantities than ' Op. cit., II, 679. Status of Household Manufactures 77 formerly, instead of selling it and purchasing a finer sort of woolen manufactures from England.' Two years later J. Bridger, who had charge of the king's masts in Maine, wrote to the Board of Trade that from December 3, 1705, to March 5, 1706, 155 dozens of wool cards had entered New England as well as a great quantity of wool combs.^ In 1708 E. Bridger addressed a letter from Boston to the same body, in which he said: "The country people or planters are entered so far into the making of their own woollens, that not one in forty but wears his own carding, spinning, etc. If the growing trade of woollens be no way prevented in its growth, England must loose the woollen export to all this part of America."^ Governor Dudley, of Massachusetts, reported the next year that the trade with England had greatly fallen off and that the people were clothing them- selves with their own wool.'' Ten years later J. Bridger wrote as follows, in answering a query of the Board of Trade: I cannot omit giving your Honr an account of the Growth & Progress of the Woolen Manufacture in this Province. In a great many sorts, as Clothes, Serges, Shaloons, Kerseys, aU sorts of StufiFs allmost and some Lirmen and there is scarce a Country man comes to town or wooman but are clothed with their own Spinning. Every ' Cited by Lord, op. cit., p. 129. It should be kept in mind that the reports of the governors and other officers to the Board of Trade were not always consistent. While one governor or officer exaggerated the amount of manufacturing done in the homes, another, through his sympathy with the colonists, minimized the extent of this sort of manufacturing. One must keep this fact constantly in mind when reading such reports and statements based on them. ' Felt, Annals of Salem, II, 160. 3 Ibid., p. 160. * Cited by Lord, op. cit., p. 131. 78 Household Manufactures in the United States one Incourages the Growth and Manufacture of this Country and not one person but discourages the Trade from home, and says tis pitty any goods should be brought from England, they can live without them.' It was also stated that much cotton was at this date imported from the Indies. The validity of this statement is attested by a report the next year (1720) by Armstrong, collector of customs for the district of New Hampshire. Speaking of his own district, he said that the woolen indus- try did not thrive so well as elsewhere, but that within three years about five hundred Irish families had settled in the province and had stimulated the inhabitants along the line of the linen-cloth industry. He asserted that the making of woolen fabrics in the other New England colonies had been brought to such perfection that thousands of pounds worth of stuffs and druggets were sold in the Boston shops.^ Furthermore, in a report of the Lords Commis- sioners of Trade and Plantation, in 1721, on the state of the colonies, it was said of Massachusetts Bay: "In this Province there are all sorts of Common manufactures. The inhabitants have always worked up their own wool into coars Clothes, druggets and serges; but these, as well as their homespun linen, which is generally half cotton, serve only for the use of the meanest sort of people."^ In spite of the complicated bounty system that Parlia- ment inaugurated in 1705 and attempted to administer during the next seventy years, the foregoing indicated increase of household manufactures in New England seems ' Baxter (editor), Doc. Hist, of the State of Me., X, 122. " Lord, op. cit., p. 136. ' Docs. Rel. Col. Hist. N.Y., V, 598. Status of Household Manufactures 79 to have been steadily maintained during the second quarter of the century.' This augmentation was not so much due, except in special instances, to the inclination of the people as to sheer necessity. Governor Dudley, of Massachusetts, testified to this fact when he said, in speaking of his people in 1709, that they were proud enough to wear the best cloths from England, if chopping, sawing, and building ships would pay for them.^ Since they could not pay for the foreign goods by these or other methods, such com- modities rapidly became, as the century increased, a luxury, enjoyed only by the well-to-do in the towns. The considerable legislation relating to textile manu- factures which was enacted, especially in Massachusetts, between 1700 and 1766 shows that the problem of supplying these necessities was continually a perplexing one.' It is also indicative of the increasing interest in the production of these fabrics. This increase was repeatedly called to the attention of the Board of Trade, and in February, 1731/32, through the pressure brought upon the House of Commons by the London merchants, led to an elaborate account of the trade carried on and the manufactures set up in the colonies detrimental to the trade and manu- factures of Great Britain. This report was made by the Board of Trade to Parliament and resulted in the act forbidding the manufacture of hats in the colonies. Concerning household manufactures the report said: ' See pp. 21 ff. for a discussion of tlie bounty system and its relation to household manufactures. ' Lord, op. cii., p. 132. 5 See pp. 34 ff. for a discussion of this legislation. 8o Household Manufactures in the United States In New England, New York, Connecticut, Rhode-island, Penn- sylvania, and in the county of Somerset, in Maryland, they have fallen into the manufacture of woolen cloth and linen cloth, for the use of their own families only. For the products of those colonies being chiefly cattle and grain, the estates of the inhabitants depends wholely on farming, which could not be managed without a certain quantity of sheep; and their wool would be entirely lost were not their servants employed during winter in manufacturing it for the use of their families. Flax and hemp being likewise easily raised, the inhabitants manufactured them into a coarse sort of cloth, bags, traces, and halters, for their horses, which they found did more service than those they had from any part of Europe. However, the high price of labour in general in America rendered it impracticable for people there to manufacture their own linen cloth at less than 20 per cent more than the rate in England, or woolen cloth at less than 50 per cent dearer than that which is exported from hence for sale.^ The foregoing statement was based on communications from the governors, who described conditions in their several colonies. Governor Belcher said that the inhabit- ants of Massachusetts worked up their wool and flax into cloth for their own use, but did not export any. In New Hampshire the manufacture of flax into linen was daily increasing because of the recent resort thither of people from Ireland. In general, the governor felt that the people did not make over one-third of their clothing.^ ' Quoted by Macpherson, op. cit., Ill, 187. It should be noted that the high price of labor spoken of above helped to keep the manufacturing in the homes. No one could afford to compete with the English goods when labor had to be purchased to manufacture articles. But as long as the women and children could do most of the work and the men could assist them when they could do little else, there was some gain in the end. The household factory furnished a market for labor which otherwise would have been lost. " Ibid., pp. 189 f. Status of Household Manufactures 8i A little closer approach than that attained by means of the preceding general evidence is gained through the inventories of any given period. The presence of raw materials and implements used in connection with home manufacturing and the finished products of the home factory indicates that such an industry existed, even though its extent cannot be definitely determined from such a source. As an example of what some of the inventories covering a decade beginning with 1716 contain, a tabula- tion of typical ones from the records of Providence, Rhode Island, is given in Table V. TABLE V Household Manufactures in Providence, Rhode Island, as Exhibited by Raw Materials, Implements, and Finished Products Listed in Inventories* Value of Articles 1. Obadiah Browne, 1716: ^'='«^ Flax in sheaf £ i os. od. Two linen wheels and an old woolen wheel 08 o Hemp on staDc 018 o Six pounds of dressed hemp o s o Six yards of linen cloth 012 o Seventeen pounds of dressed flax o 14 2 Thirteen yards of linen cloth i 6 o Nine yards of " Casy " cloth 2 s o One hatchel, some tow yarn, and a bunch of field hemp o 9 6 Fourteen yards of linen cloth i 6 o White leather skin and calfskin o 3 o 2. Jonathan Knight, 1717: Two spinning-wheels and chairs on o Sheep's wool and new cloth 4 s o Two calfskins and shoe leather o 7 o Yarn, taglocks, and tow 017 4 * Early Records of the Town oj Providence, R.I., XVI, i, 26, 88, log, 137, i8g, 217, 236, 3231 3S5, 463. Out of a total of ninety-one itemized inventories, seventy contained either materials, implements, or products relating to goods made in families. 82 Household Manufactures in the United States TABLE V—Contimted Value of Articles Listed 3. John Paine, 1718: Leather i 3 o Ten pounds of woolen yarn, two pounds of cotton yam 115 10 Sheep's wool 2 o o Worsted, twelve yards 112 o One weaver's loom and five slays 2 o o Small bull's hide and four sheepskins o 8 o 4. Ensign R. Waterman, 1719: Fifteen and one-half yards new linen cloth, and six yards new cotton and linen cloth 317 o Table linen and new woolen cloth 415 6 Two spinning-wheels and one pair cards o 19 o Cider, beer, and apple-null and cider-press 39 o Two dressed deerskins in o 5. Stephen Arnold, 1720: Two woolen cards and one basket on o Thirty-three yards woolen doth 9 i 6 Ten yards tow cloth i o o Six yards woolen cloth and some linen cloth 27 o Eleven yards worsted cloth 2 9 6 Fifteen yards osnaburg 2 10 o 6. Jonathan Whipple, 1721: Yam and wool i o o One linen wheel o 3 o One woolen wheel o 4 o Leather o 10 o Flax o 10 o One hatchel, one and one-half calfskins o 4 o One cider-mill and press i o o 7. Aleizer Arnold, 1722: Three "bits" of new cloth 117 4 Spinning-wheel and warming-pan i 4 o Twenty-seven and one-half pounds wool 20 o One blanket, eight pounds of wool, and a bedcordf 015 o t Such items as sheets, pillowcases, towels, tablecloths, napkins, coverlids, blankets, etc., were very numerous in the inventories. They have not been generally included in this list because they were not designated as homemade. In all probability most of them were. Status of Household Manufactures 83 TABLE y— Continued- Value of Articles Listed 8. Joanna Inman, 1723: A loom, quill wheel, and warping tackle 3 o o One and one-half yards woolen cloth and a bit of flannel on 6 Six and one-half yards cotton and linen cloth .... 016 o Seventeen yards worsted cloth 4 5 7 Two pairs of cards o 8 o Flax o 4 o Cotton wool 1 3 o Sheep's wool o 7 6 Linen wheel o 6 o One and one-half pair of worsted combs i 5 o 9. Richard Borden, 1724: Four pounds woolen yarn and one pound linen yam o 14 o Four yards cotton and linen cloth 014 o Two yards tackling and three wheels, three pounds of combed wool o 9 o Ninety-two and three-fourths pounds sheep's wool 63 8 Flax and tow o 4 o Tanned leather 2 o 7 Three pairs of old cards o 6 o Cider-miU and cider-press i S o Nine barrels cider S i 4 Eight barrels apple beer 016 o Fourteen and one-half pounds linen yarn 215 7 Five and one-fourth yards napkin cloth 013 o 10. Arthiu' Fenner, 1725: Thirty-eight yards new cloth 10 9 10 Two yards cloth and four and one-half pounds yarn 015 o Flax I 2 o One pair worsted cards, and three pairs of cards. . 2 14 o Fifteen pounds hemp o 10 o Sixteen yards new cloth 6 8 o Four spinning-wheels and a clock reel i 8 o Eighteen pounds cotton wool 2 2 o Sixty-six pounds sheep's wool 4 2 6 Two looms, with harness, slays, and warping bars 30 o Tanned leather 3 8 o 84 Household Manufactures in the United States TABLE V— Continued Value of Articles II. Josiah Thornton, 1726: ^'^^^ Woolen yarn 3 4 6 Thirteen pounds wool and thirty-four pounds flax 2 13 2 New cloth 516 o Two spinning-wheels and two brooms on o One barrel of cider and three empty barrels o 16 3 Linen cloth and some table linen 015 o Space will not permit a continuation of these interesting inventories. Some idea of what is included in the entire number can be gained from the following tabulation of their contents. In the 70 containing such items as the foregoing, spinning-wheels were mentioned 50 times; sheep's wool, 30; flax, dressed and undressed, 30; cards, 24; leather, 20; woolen yarn, 16; yarn (kind not designated), 14; loom and tackling, 9; linen cloth, 13; cotton cloth (kind not desig- nated), 11; cotton wool and woolen cloth, 8 each; hatchel and worsted, 7 each; cotton yarn and hemp on stalk or dressed, 6 each; shoemakers' tools, combs, and cloth of cotton and linen, 5 each; tow, 4; cider-mill and press, reel, and cloth of cotton and wool, 3 each; tow yarn, home- spun cloth, sheepskins, worsted combs, combed wool, 2 each; and coopering tools, weaver's shuttle, apple beer, cider, cotton tow, flax brake, quill wheel, tallow, cloth of wool and flax, tow cloth, warping tackle, and calfskin, i each. Certain conclusions are obvious from this tabulation. The fact that a loom is listed in but nine inventories, while spinning-wheels appear in fifty, hints that most of the weav- ing must have been done by professional weavers.' It is ' The following are some interesting facts relative to spinning-wheels. In all, one hundred wheels were listed. Two, without any designation of the kind, were mentioned in 20 inventories; three, in s; four and five, in Status of Household Manufactures 85 also clear that wool and flax were the raw materials in most common use, cotton appearing but 8 times. The appear- ance of leather 20 times and shoemaker's tools but 5 sug- gests the itinerant shoemaker. From the entire absence of candles one is led to conclude that candle-making in the home was not an industry at this time in Providence. And finally, the appearance of but three cider-mills and presses imphes that cider-making was not a common industry during the time covered by the inventories. The enthusiasm in New England for household manu- factures at times expressed itself in the form of a modem "craze." Between 1700 and the breaking out of the Revo- lution there was going on in this region an economic revolu- tion of which the mother-country seemed unaware. Some outward signs of this revolution were the periodic "spinning crazes" that swept over this section during these years. Such movements were responsible for originating and sustaining the emotional stimulus needed to keep the women busy at their wheels and looms and the men at making all sorts of necessary utensils during a time in which they were imable to secure the requisite medium of exchange to buy English manufactured goods. It was this region that felt most keenly the adverse effects of the mercantile system which the king and Parliament attempted to foist upon the colonies. 2 each; and one, in 7. Linen wheels were designated in 13 cases and woolen in 12, a total of 16 of the former and 13 of the latter. The mentioning of two wheels 20 times without designating the kind leads one to suspect that in most cases one was a linen and one was a woolen wheel. The appearance of raw wool and flax an equal number of times suggests the same thing. 86 Household Manufactures in the United States The first "spinning craze" of any note occurred in Boston in 172 1. The coming of the Scotch-Irish in August, 17 18/ stimulated much interest in the raising of flax and the manufacture of linen cloth. So, on Septem- ber 28, 1720, at a town meeting called especially to con- sider the question of spinning, a committee was appointed to "Consider abt promoting of a Spinning School or Schools, for the Instruction of the children of this town, in Spinning."^ On the recommendation of this committee such a school was established, the selectmen appropriating £300 for the purpose.^ To house it, a large building was erected on what was then Longacre Street; and on the occa- sion of its opening, the women, rich and poor, appeared on the Common with their wheels and vied with each other in their skill in using them.'' While the school continued but three or four years, yet the interest stimulated by the movement did not die so soon. Ten years later (1731) one Daniel Oliver bequeathed to the town a large house valued at £600 to be used for a spinning school where poor children were to be taught gratis.* Another "craze" spread over Boston and vicinity in 1753 and 1754. The interest in spinning manifested during these years was largely the result of work done by the ' Hanna, Scotch-Irish, II, 17. 'Bost. Town Rec. (1700-1728), p. 147. 3 Ref. of the Bost. Selectmen (1716-36), p. 80. * Ciake, Hist, and Antiq. of Bost., pp. 560 f. 5 Ilid., p. 591, note. Oliver was chairman of the committee to provide a spinning school. Bagnall thinks that the house he bequeathed to the town was one he had probably built for the school {Textile Industries, I, 19). Status of Household Manufactures 87 Boston Society for Promoting Industry and Employing the Poor, which was formed in 1751.' On the second anniversary of this society a public celebration was held. "In the afternoon about three hundred spinsters, cleanly dressed, appeared on the Common at their spinning-wheels. The wheels were placed regularly in three rows and a female was seated at each wheel. The weavers also appeared, cleanly dressed, in garments of their own weav- ing. One of them, working at a loom on a stage, was carried on men's shoulders, attended with music. An immense number of spectators was present at this inter- esting spectacle."^ This enthusiasm bore fruit in the law of 1753 appropriating £1,500 to establish a spinning school in Boston, and a tax on coaches, chariots, etc., to raise this amount.^ The school was established, but the interest in it was short-lived. Upon the breaking out of the war in 1754 the enthusiasm of the people for spinning was turned in another direction. The young ladies were now kept busy making garments for the men at the front. After the soldiers from Boston had been in the field four months, word of their suffering from want of clothing reached their friends. Immediately a number of young ladies volun- teered their services to the town authorities, offering gratuitously to make garments for those engaged in their country's service.* The records indicate that these indus- trious ladies really made more homespun than was needed ' Bagnall, op. cil., p. 35. This date is given as 1749 by Holmes, Am. Annals, 11, 180, and in Mem. Hist, of Bost., II, 462. ' Holmes, op. cit., II, 196. ' Cf. pp. 3S ff. * Drake, op. cit., p. 639. 88 Household Manufactures in the United States by their own people. In a cargo of goods sent from Boston to Albany, New York, in 1756, there appeared two hundred homemade jackets.' While local traffic in homespun had long been a common custom in many of the older New England towns,^ the export business seems to have been a new venture. The interest in the spinning school in Boston was revived in 1762. Notice was given this year that the school in the "Manufacturing House was again open and that any one could learn to spin gratis." After the first four months the spinners were to receive pay. A premium of £18 was also offered to the four best spinners.' This revived interest, however, was of short duration; for in 1767, in the midst of the rejoicing over the repeal of the Stamp Act, the building was ordered sold, since trade was reopened with England and the economic outlook seemed brighter.'' But the rejoicing was brief, and ere long another "spinning craze" was on. This enthusiasm was the direct result of England's taxing measures and marks the beginning of an important era in the struggle for economic independence — but more of this in a subsequent section. In order to substantiate the statement made above that the status of household manufactures was much the same during most of the colonial period in all of the territory north of Maryland, a brief presentation of conditions in the ' Weeden, op. cit., II, 679. •■ Judd, Hist, of Hadley, p. 359; also Temple, Hist, of Whately, p. 70. 3 Drake, op. cit., p. 660. < Ibid., p. 719- Status of Household Manufactures 89 middle colonies seems necessary. In 1708 Caleb Heath- cote, then a member of the Council in New York, wrote to the Board of Trade that three-fourths of the linen and woolen goods used by the people were made among them, and that if some speedy and efl&cient way was not found to put a stop to it they would carry it on a great deal further, and perhaps in time to the prejudice of the goods manu- factured in England.^ Governor Hunter wrote in 1715, in answer to queries concerning the extent to which home- spun was used, that the people in the cities of New York and Albany wore no clothing of their own manufacture, but that the planters and poorer sort were clothed by their own efforts and work, and that the few who could not afford English manufactures wore homespun. It was his belief that a law forcing the people to wear English-made goods would be equivalent to one compelling them to go naked, for goods sold at 100 per cent advance in New York over what they sold for in England. He had no knowledge that any homespun had every been sold in shops.^ The general report submitted in February, 1731/32, to which reference has already been made, included all the middle region in the generalization regarding the amount of goods made in the homes. Subsequent reports attest the truth of the generalization. It was asserted of New York, in 1737, that the country people for many years had been making in their homes from flax and wool enough clothing to supply their needs.' Similar statements were made in reports dated January, 1746/47, and May, 1749.'' ' Docs. Rel. Col. Hist. N.Y., V, 63. s ihid., VI, 127. ' Ibid., p. 460. * Ibid., pp. 393, 511. go Household Manufactures in the United States Conditions in the other middle colonies were not unlike those in New York. In 1728 Governor William Keith, of New Jersey, wrote that "every Farmer is by Industry led to employ his spare time in working up the wool of the few sheep he is obliged to keep on his Farm, for the Im- provement of his Land, for the use of his Family, and in like manner he often Raises a small Quantity of Flax, which is broke or dress'd commonly in the Winter Season, and Spun up into Course Cloth by the old Women and children, for the same use.'"' Acrelius, writing of condi- tions in Delaware from about 1725 to 1758, said: "The articles of dress are very little different among the city and country people, except that the former procure them from merchants' shops, and the latter make them for them- selves, and usually of coarser stuff. Wool-, weaving-, and fulling-mills are not used for manufacturing broadcloth, camelot, and other woolen cloths, which might be finer, if more carefully attended to. The coloring of certain stuffs is very inferior. Silks are rare even in the towns. Plush is general, and satin is very widely used all over the country."'^ Referring chiefly to Pennsylvania, Douglas, in 1753, said that perhaps the farmers made nine-tenths of all their wearing apparel.^ Of the Dutch he remarked : " Most of the Dutch Husband-men have Stills, and draw a Spirit from Rye malted, from Apples and Peaches. There may be from 7,000 to 8,000 Dutch Waggons with four Horses each, that from Time to Time bring their Pro- ' N.J. Archives, ist ser., V, 203 f. 'Hist, of New Sweden (ed. i75g, Eng. tr. Reynolds, 1874), p. 157. 3 A Summary, Historical and Political (ed. 1753), II, 332. Status of Household Manufactures 91 duce and Traffick to Philadelphia, from 10 to 100 Miles Distance.'" One has an indirect check on the foregoing general statements in certain facts revealed in the notices of run- away servants and slaves appearing in the newspapers of TABLE VI Clothing Worn by Runaway Servants and Slaves in New Jersey, 1704-79* Years No. or Cases Part op Clothing Desig- nated AS Homemade None op Clothing Desig- nated AS Homemade Clothing Made op Buckskin, Leather, Bearskin Osnabxtsg LlNSEY- WOOLSEY 1 1 I/} iS % CO 1 C/3 > 7n 1 1 1 1 a % 55 1704-39 1740-50 1751-55 1755-61 1762-65 1766-67 1768-69 1770-71 1776-77 1778 1779 89 129 120 34 80 43 61 61 44 S 7 8 18 23 IS 22 23 24 14 14 14 14 50 49 30 5 13 12 14 14 IS 2 2 5 2 10 4 9 6 4 3 6 3 39 80 91 29 67 31 47 47 29 3 S 3 16 13 15 18 14 18 10 II 8 II 32 35 55 15 30 9 IS 26 12 2 3 2 I 9 5 9 5 6 7 4 4 8 25 45 37 8 17 13 15 7 7 I I I 5 6 I 7 3 3 2 3 8 3 4 3 I u I 3 2 Totals . . 673 189 206 52 468 137 234 60 176 31 20 S * A few cases of apprentices are included with the servants. The table is based on 863 notices of runaway slaves and servants. These notices are published in NJ. Arckivest I3t ser., Vols. XI, XH, XX, XXIV, XXV, XXVI, XXVII, and 2d ser., Vols. I, II, III, IV. No data were given in the extracts for the years 1771-76. the period to which such statements relate. These adver- tisements usually gave in considerable detail a description of the clothing worn by the fugitives. Table VI exhibits ' Ibid., p. 333. 92 Household Manufactures in the United States facts revealed by 863 announcements of runaway servants and slaves in the New Jersey colony during seventy years of its history. Counting the sum of all cases in each of the eleven diSerent periods included in Table VI, the percentage of cases for each in the order given in which a part of the clothing was specifically designated as homespun is as foUows: 57, 34, 28, 10, 17, 32, 24, 24, 31, 42, and 24; for the entire period covered by all cases, 30 per cent. If to the number of cases in which homespun was specified there were added those in the last three columns, all of which could have been made in the home, these percentages would be considerably increased. Since such items are not clear cases, they will be left to tell their own story. The indis- putable ones show that quite a considerable amount of the apparel of servants and slaves in colonial New Jersey must have been homemade. The discussion of household manufactures in the South during the period under consideration will be prefaced by a brief treatment of the same subject in the back-country of this section. Such a statement will serve as an admirable transfer from our lengthy canvass of the northern section where household manufacturing was more or less perma- nent, to the southern, where it was sporadic. These back- country districts were southern only in location. In respect to the status of home industries, as well as other phases of their industrial life, they were strictly north- ern — a fact which must always be kept in mind in thinking of the southern colonies during much of their history. Status of Household Manufactures 93 The filling up of the back-country in the South with Germans and Scotch-Irish during the second quarter of the eighteenth century greatly diversified the general economic life of the section as a whole."^ These people were small farmers. On account of their remoteness from the coast, their lack of facilities to market their crops, and the tradi- tions they brought with them, they turned their attention to household manufacturing from the beginning of their settlement. In fact, for many years they were almost economically independent of the outside world. They raised their wool, cotton, flax, hemp, and hides, and made them into clothing, shoes, and harness. Their mines, mills, and forges supplied them with utensils and imple- ments, which were usually made by the farmers themselves. Speaking of the pioneer settlers who came into Rocking- ham County, Virginia, between 1730 and 1750, a careful writer says: "When the pioneer settlers came to Rocking- ham County from 1730 to 1750 to make their homes, one of the first machines they set up was the old loom. It found its abiding place in one of the rooms of the main house or in a shed attached to the house; sometimes in the attic; and often a house was built especially for the loom."^ Doddridge, whose father was one of the pioneer settlers of Washington County, Pennsylvania, where conditions were similar to those in western Virginia, informs us that the clothing was practically all of household manufacture ' See Faust, German Element in U.S., I, chaps, ii., vi, vii, viii; also Hanna, Scotch-Irish, II, chap. ii. "Heatwole, "Hand-Weaving in Rockingham County, Va."; Wayland, Bist. of Rockingham Co., Va., p. 381. 94 Household Manufactures in the United States and that every house contained a loom and almost every woman was a weaver. From him we also learn that prac- tically every family had its tailors and its shoemakers and that both shoes and shoepacks vere made, the latter by those who could not make the former. In almost every household hominy blocks and handmills were in use. With the mortar and pestle, handmiU or grater, these early settlers pounded, ground, or grated their corn so that it could be made into mush or cakes. Besides the immediate necessities of life, plows, harrows, sleds, cooper-ware, cedar-ware, and looms were made.' All these were manu- factured on the farms, since few persons in the early stages of the settlements could make a living by depending solely upon aiiy one of the mechanic arts. Under such a regime men became mechanical geniuses of the highest order. Doddridge's father was one of these. He was an expert on the loom of his own construction; spun his own shoethread; made all the shoes for the family; made his own cooper- ware; did his own carpentering; and during his later life, when unable for service on the scouts and campaigns, did the rifle repairing for the whole neighborhood.^ This r6gime remained thus in the newer settlements throughout the eighteenth century. It has already been suggested that the southern colonies (the back-country excepted) never gave the mother-country much concern regarding the working out of her mercantile policy. They were content to have supplies of all kinds from England in return for their tobacco, tar, pitch, rice, ' Doddridge, Notes (ed. 1912), pp. iioff. 'Ibid., p. 114. Status of Household Manufactures 95 indigo, flax, hemp, silk, wool, and leather. The reliance upon the outside world for clothing and other supplies was so great that much suffering ensued among them when this supply was temporarily cut off. Of this dependence, Beverly, speaking of Virginia about 1703, remarked: They have their Cloathing of all sorts from England, as Linnen, Woolen, Silk, Hats, and Leather. Yet Flax, and Hemp grow no where in the World, better than there; their Sheep yield a mighty Increase, and bear good Fleeces, but they shear them only to cool them The very Furrs that their Hats are made of, perhaps go first from thence; and most of their Hides lie and rot, or are made use of, only for covering dry Goods, in a leaky House. Indeed some few Hides with much adue are tann'd, and made into Servant's Shoes; but at so careless a rate, that the Planters don't care to buy them, if they can get others; and sometimes perhaps a better manager than ordinary, wUl vouchsafe to make a pair of Breeches of a Deer- Skin. Nay, they are such abominable Ill-husbands, that tho' their Coimtry be overrun with Wood, yet they have all their Wooden- Ware from England; their Cabinets, Chairs, Tables, Stools, Chests, Boxes, Cart- Wheels, and all other things, even so much as the Bowls, and Birchen Brooms, to the Eternal Reproach of their Laziness.' While Beverly's account is doubtless an exaggerated one, yet the people as a general rule did not engage in house- hold or plantation manufacturing to any considerable extent unless forced to do so by an inadequate supply of goods, caused by certain economic conditions over which they had no control. For example, it was said of Virginia in 1705: "The quantity of Goods and especially of Cloathing imported of late, not being sufficient for suppljdng the Country, Many of the Inhabitants, .... have this last 'Bist. of the Present State of Va. (ist ed., 1705), Book IV, Part II, P-S8. 96 Household Manufactures in the United States year, planted a considerable quantity of Cotton.'" Refer- ence has already been made to the picture of conditions in Virginia in 17 10 given by Governor Spotswood.^ Even as early as 1697 the Council of Maryland reported to the Board of Trade that necessity had taught some of the inhabitants to use the native wool for coarse stockings and clothing for servants and slaves.* In petitioning the Board for relief in 17 13 the Council said that, "had not many people Applyed themselves to Spinning the little wooll their Small fflocks of Sheep afford, and likewise some Small Quantitys of Flax, they would have Suffered very much for want of Necessary Cloathing."'' The next year it was reported that many of the people were stark naked, which occasioned them to turn their hands to the manufacture of linen and woolen cloth.^ These citations substantiate the statement that whatever manufacturing was done in the homes and on the plantations in the region under discus- sion was done more from necessity than from inclination — a fact truer of this section up to 1766 than any of those heretofore treated. While household manufacturing was not an important element in the life and prosperity of the people in this southern region under discussion, yet there was some going on in the more or less remote districts between 1700 and 1766. Evidence of this is found in statements of contem- porary writers. Lawson, speaking of North Carolina about 1714, said: "The women are the most Industrious Sex " Cited by Morriss, op. cit., p. 64. ' Cf. pp. 49 fE. * Morriss, op. cit., p. 71. ' Archives of Md., XIX, 540. = Ibid., p. 6s» Status of Household Manufactures 97 in that place, and by their good Housewifry, make a good deal of Cloath of their own cotton, Wool, and Flax; some of them keeping their families (though large) very decently apparel'd, both with linnens and Woolens, so that they have no occasion to run into the Merchant's debt or lay their money out on stores for cloathing/ Similar condi- tions still existed in 1728 in this colony. Describing the state of affairs as he saw it at this date while surveying the "dividing-line" between North Carolina and Virginia, WUliam Byrd commented as follows on what he observed on Timothy Ivy's plantation: We saw no Drones there, which are but too Common, alas, in that Part of the World. Tho', in truth, the Distemper of Laziness seizes the Men oftener much than the Women. These last Spin, weave, and knit, all with their own Hands, while their Husbands, depending on the Bounty of the Climate, are Sloathful in everything but getting of Children, and in that only Instance make themselves useful Members of an Infant-Colony. There is but little wool in that Province, tho' Cotton grows very kindly, and, so far South, is Seldom nippt by the Frost. The Good Women mix this with their Wool for their outer Garments; tho', for want of Fulling, that kind of manufacture is Open and Sleazy.^ It is not the aim, in citing such sources, to leave the impression that manufacturing was carried on in the homes of this southern seaboard region to any considerable extent ' Hist. ofN.C. (reprint of ed. 1714, Charlotte, N.C., 1903), p. 47. Law- son made extensive travels in North and South Carolina before writing his history. He had the opportunity of gaining first-hand knowledge. He was general surveyor of North Carolina when he gathered the material for his book. 'Bassett (editor). Writings of Col. William Byrd, p. 56. 98 Household Manufactures in the United States before 1766. In fact, the evidence leads one to conclude that the amount generally done was rather inconsiderable. A few citations wiU substantiate this statement. A report on Maryland in 1721 said: "The Inhabitants wear the like Cloathing and have the same furniture within their houses with those in this Kingdom. The slaves are cloathed with Cottons, Kerseys, flannels, & coarse linnens, all imported; & it is computed that this province consumes of British Manufactures to the value of £20,000 per annum.'" In commenting on industrial conditions in Virginia in 1759 as he noted them on traveling through the colony, Burnaby remarked: "Their manufactures are very inconsiderable. They make a kind of cotton cloth which they clothe themselves with in common, and call it after the name of their country; and some inconsiderable quantities of linen, hose, and other trifling articles; but nothing to deserve attention."* It was said of South Carolina in 1760 that cloths, broad and narrow of all sorts, from the finest broadcloth down to negro-cloth, came from without, none having been manufactured there except a little negro-cloth and that only when the produce of the province bore but a low price. Small quantities of linen were imported from the vicinity of Williamsburg, Virginia. It was made by the Scotch-Irish living there.' As early as 1740 Georgia was making a few stockings from the native ■ Docs. Rel. Col. Hist. N.Y., V, 606. ' Travels through the Middle Settlements in N.A. (2d ed., London, 177s), P- 21- ^ A Description of S.C. (London, 1761), attributed to Governor James Glen. See also Carroll, Hist. Colls, of S.C, II. Status of Household Manufactures 99 cotton, but depended upon the outside world for the greater part of her supplies.' Some of these came from Frederick, Maryland, where a band of Germans from the Palatinate had settled in 1749. These people carried on a rather extensive trade with the people of Georgia, sending them boots, shoes, saddles, all kinds of harness, fine woolen goods, sheetings and table linen, counterpanes, made of flax and woolen thread.^ Thus, except in specific localities where a group of Quakers, Germans, or Scotch-Irish had settled, no consistent policy of household manufacturing was followed in the low-country districts of the South before the agita- tion caused by the Stamp Act and the other taxing measures following it. An excellent summary of the status of household manu- factures in the various sections of the country during the last half of the period under discussion is contained in certain reports made to the Lords of Trade by the colonial governors on the general state and progress of manufactures in their respective jurisdictions. On August i, 1766, letters were addressed to all the colonial governors demand- ing a report on the manufactures set up and carried on in the colonies since 1734.' A second copy of the letter was ' Col. Rec. of Ga., V, 443. "Tyson, "A Brief Account of the Settlement of Ellicott's MUls," Md. Hist. Soc. Pubs., I-VI, No. 4, p. 55. ' These reports seem to overlap the discussion given in the opening of the following section. It should be kept in mind that the governors were reporting on conditions since 1734. Furthermore, the climax of the boy- cotting of English goods did not come until 1768, hence the full effects of the factors mentioned below were not yet felt when the reports were made. loo Household Manufactures in the United States sent out in February, 1768, with the injunction to furnish the required information made even stronger than in the first copy." Governor Wentworth, of New Hampshire, in response to these circulars, reported that in his jurisdiction there were manufactured annually from native flax 25,000 yards of linen, which freely sold for 37 cents a yard. This was from 20 to 40 per cent higher than the price of corre- sponding imported linen. In the farmers' families much native wool was also manufactured, and nearly enough saddles were made to supply the home demand.^ Since a report made in 1763 by Gk)vernor Bernard, of Massachusetts, contained about all there was to say con- cerning manufactures in his colony, there was little need for an elaborate account in 1768. At the former date the governor reported: The inhabitants of the trading towns, men, women, children, have their whole supply of clothing from Great Britain. Most of the women in all other towns have the principal part of their clothing of British manufacture; the men have more or less. The poor labor- ing people in the country towns wear their own common clothes principally of coarse homespun linens and woolens. Shoes are to be excepted, the men's being generally made here, the women's partly only. Most of the furniture of the houses in the trading towns is of British manufacture. Nails, glass, lead, locks, hinges, and many other materials for houses are whoUy imported from Great Britain. Canvas, cordage, ship chandlery wares for vessels and in general such manufactures as are exported to the plantations are consumed here, and by the best information I can get the consumption increases rather than decreases.^ 'Clark, Hist, of Manufactures in the U.S., p. 207. 'Ibid. 3 Quoted ibid., pp. 207 f. Status of Household Manufactures loi Governor William Pitkin, of Connecticut, on Decem- ber 5, 1766, wrote to the Board, in answer to the inquiry concerning the several manufactures set up and carried on in his colony, in part as follows: There are in sundry Towns in this Colony some small Buildings erected for the manufacture of Ashes, for making Pot Ash, and this by Ashes almost entirely collected from the House Hearths of the inhabitants The Inhabitants of this Colony are chiefly Employed in subduing and Improving Land, do nothing more at the Woolen & Linen Manufactures than to supply the Deficiencies of what our produce Enables us to purchase of Great Britain, and what is wrought of that Kind, is principally of the Courser Sort for Laborers & Servants which is done by particular Families for their Neces- sary use.' Governor Moore, of New York, reporting on January 12, 1767, portrayed conditions in his province in language as follows: The custom of making these coarse cloths [woolen and linsey- woolsey] in private families prevails throughout the whole Province, and in almost every House a sufficient quantity is manufactured for the use of the Family, without the least design of sending any of it to market. This I had an opportunity of seeing during the late Tour I made, and had the same Accounts given me by all those persons, of whom I made any inquiry, for every home swarms with children, who are set to work as soon as they are able to Spin and card; and as every family is furnished with a Loom, the Itinerant Weavers who travel about the Country, put the finishing hand to the work.^ ' Board of Trade Papers, "Proprieties," XXII, 129; transcript in Hist. Soc. Pa. Library. The report of the governor of Rhode Island made no mention of household manufactures (Clark, op. cit., p. 208). 'Docs. Rel. Col. Hist. N.Y., VII, 888. I02 Household Manufactures in the United States Deputy Governor Penn, of Pennsylvania, made no mention of household manufactures in his report.* Gov- ernor Franklin, of New Jersey, answered as follows: As to Manufactures in this Colony, I can assure your Lordship [Earl of Hillsborough] that there are none either of woolen or Linen which deserve to be caU'd by that Name. It is true that many Families who live on Farms make some coarse Cloathing for them- selves or Servants, but it is by no means sufficient for their con- sumption." These statements indicate that the people of New York in about 1767 were very active in making goods in their homes, while in the other colonies reporting there was nothing unusual about such manufacturing. People were engaging in it as an industry from which there was no escape, because of their inability to secure such articles from other sources. Such was also true of the people in Maryland, as evidenced by Governor Sharpe's report in 1768, which contained the following paragraph relative to household manufactures: A great many Families however throughout the Province make both Linen & Woolen Cloathing for their own use, & in order to encourage the making Linen Acts of the Assembly have from time to time been made granting Bounties to those Persons that annually produce to the several County Courts the Best Pieces of Linen manu- factured by White inhabitants in the respective Counties. The Act under which Bounties are now paid was made three years ago & is to continue in force till the year 1770, but it is not supposed to have any great Effect nor do I apprehend that the Inhabitants wiU think much of Manufacturing for themselves while they can with the produce of their Lands purchase such Goods as they may have occasion for.' ^ Pa. Archives, 4th ser., Ill, 332. ' NJ. Archives, ist ser., X, 30. ' Archives of Md., XIV, 496 f. Status of Household Manufactures 103 The conditions in parts of North Carolina were much similar to those in Maryland. Governor Tryon's report, dated January 30, 1767, contained the following on the subject: There are dispersed over this colony more particularly ia the northern and western settlements some spinning wheels and looms for the manufacture of cotton, wool and flax, but no greater quantities of stuffs or coarse cloths are made than will supply the respective families in which they are worked; very few indeed make suiEcient for their own wear. I have not heard of a piece of woolen or linnen cloth being ever sold that was the manufacture of this province. It is the usage of some families who from poverty or other circum- stances have no looms, to send their woolen and linnen yarn to their neighbours to weave. Sheep are not yet become a staple of this country tho' they thrive well here; the wool therefore being very inconsiderable in quantity, is generally mixed with cotton in the manufacture.' Governor Wright, of Georgia, on November 18, 1766, wrote: Some few of the poorer and more industrious people make a trifling quantity of coarse homespun cloth for their own families, and knit a few cotton and yarn stockings for their own use, and this done but by a very few, and I don't know that there is or has been a yard of linen cloth of any kind manufactured in this province.' These official reports^ warrant the general conclusion that, long before the breaking out of the excitement caused ' Col. Rec. ofN.C, VII, 429. ' Quoted by Jones, Hist, of Ga., II, 24. Original in Marquis of Lans- downe's CoUs. Answers to Am. Cir., Vol. LV. 3 There seems to be no good reason for questioning the reliability of the foregoing reports. Household manufacturing was not against any English law or regulation, and the Board of Trade had gone on record as opposing I04 Household Manufactures in the United States by the Stamp Act controversy, household manufacturing was a common industry among the country people and was carried on not so much from desire as from necessity. In some instances families made enough for their own use and no more. Homemade goods were rarely exported or sold in shops, especially outside of New England. The household manufactures reported in the district south of Maryland were carried on principally in the back-country, which was settled by people more or less mechanically inclined. NEW INFLXIENCES AND TENDENCIES Of all the factors affecting household manufactures during the colonial period, the political controversies follow- ing 1765, and the Revolution in which these culminated, were the two most potent ones. Up to the beginning of the Stamp Act controversy and the non-importation, non-exportation, and non-consumption agreements grow- ing out of it and subsequent events, household manufac- tures were local. By this is meant that they were carried on in certain localities where the economic status required such a supplement to the other regular labors, or merely as a temporary relief from an inadequate supply of foreign goods, or from a dull or obstructed market for certain any restrictions upon it other than those contained in the act of ifigg. While a governor might have colored his report favorably or imfavorably to his colony in regard to manufactures carried on contrary to the laws of England, there was seemingly no reason why he should fail to report condi- tions just as they existed in respect to family manufactures. Of course one governor might have reported conditions in milder terms than another. The report from Connecticut seems to have been one of the more moderate ones. Status of Household Manufactures 105 staple products. But along with, and in consequence of, the disputes over the right of England to tax the colonies came the generalizing of an industry which had heretofore been both local and sporadic. There arose out of this controversy a definite notion among the colonies as a whole that closely connected with political was economic inde- pendence. This belief led the people, north and south alike, to rely mainly upon the home factory to establish this industrial self-sufficiency, since no adequate system of factory manufacturing had been permitted to grow up under England's restrictive colonial policy. The trouble caused by the Stamp Act created both a desire for American goods and a determination to use no other. This determination found expression in the non- importation, non-consumption, and non-exportation resolu- tions discussed in chapter ii. These resolves were the tools used by the radical element to carry out a growing desire for economic independence as well as to bring the influence of the English merchants to bear in their favor against laws of a similar nature. Now, to carry out measures so radical and that demanded so much sacrifice on the part of so many, required considerable pressure from various sources. Much of the social pressure, especially in New England, was furnished by the Daughters of Liberty, a society whose members pledged themselves not to buy goods from British importers and shopkeepers.' This society had organizations in many sections of New England ■Jameson says that this society was formed in Boston in 1769-70 {Diet, of U.S. Hist., p. 185). The society certainly existed before this date, for the meeting, an account of which is given on p. 106, was held in March, 1766. io6 Household Manufactures in the United States and did effective work in creating sentiment in favor of the production and consumption of American rather than English goods. The effective tool for crystallizing sentiment in favor of homemade goods used by the Daughters of Liberty was the "spinning bee." While this was not a new form of social gathering in New England, yet it was probably used at this particular time more generally and more effectively than ever before. From early in 1766 to about 1771 "spinning bees " were the rage in this region. On March 4, 1766, one of these revived gatherings was held in Provi- dence, Rhode Island. The spirit displayed by the women who attended the meeting was vividly portrayed by the author of the following account, which appeared in the Boston Chronicle, April 7, 1766: On the 4th instant, eighteen daughters of liberty, young ladies of good reputation, assembled at the house of doctor Ephraim Bowen, in this town, in consequence of an invitation of that gentleman, who had discovered a laudable zeal for the introducing Home Manu- factures. There they exhibited a fine example of industry, by spin- ning from sunrise imtU dark, and displayed a spirit for saving their sinking country, rarely to be found among persons of more age and experience.' The next assemblage of the society was held in the courthouse, when a handsome piece of linen was made and given as a premium for the largest amount of flax raised in Providence County during the year.^ Similar gatherings were held in other parts of New England. For example, • The communication was dated March 12, 1766; quoted in Niks' Register, XXXIX, 195. " Arnold, Hist, of R.I., H, 266. Status of Household Manufactures 107 forty-five young women met at the house of Rev. Samuel Webster, of Salisbury, on August 17, 1767, and spun from about five o'clock in the morning until five in the afternoon. They carded and spun over 10 1 single skeins of cotton yam and 100 of linen.' The ladies of Byfield were likewise busy with their wheels. In August, 1768, they met, twenty-five strong, at the minister's home, where they carded and spun twenty double skeins of cotton yam and sixty of linen, each skein containing forty threads two yards long to a knot.^ On April 20, 1768, twenty-five ladies of Newbury assembled at the home of Rev. Mr. Parsons and spun 270 skeins of good yam.^ As late as May 21, 1770, the following account appeared in the Boston Gazette: "Last Wednesday forty-five Daughters of Liberty met in the morning at the house of the Rev. Mr. Moore- head in this town; and in the afternoon they exceeded fifty. By the evening of said day they spun two hundred and thirty-two skeins of yarn — some very fine. Their labors and materials were all generously given to the worthy pastor '' ^ Essex Gazette, August 22-29, 1769; quoted in Essex Antiquarian, XII, S7. 'Essex Gazette, August 23, 1768; quoted in Essex Antiquarian, I, 51. Similar gatherings in other towns of Essex County were reported in the Gazette, December 20-27, 1768, and August 15-22, 1769 (quoted in Essex Antiquarian, IV, 38, and XII, 40). The Boston News Letter of June 22 and July 6, 1769, contained reports of spinning bees at Rowley, Ipswich, and Beverly. These are quoted by Bagnall, op. cit., p. 58. 3 Coffin, Hist, of Newbury, p. 234. * Quoted in Mem. Hist, of Bost., Ill, 150. Besides the general enthu- siasm produced by the "spinning bees" and "matches," the minister often preached a sermon to the ladies in which he admonished them to cast aside io8 Household Manufactures in the United States The result of all this agitation is seen in the actual out- put of some of the homes. In 1767 a small country town in Massachusetts manufactured 30,000 yards of cloth.' Ebenezer Hurd, of Saybrbok, Connecticut, made in the same year, by the help of his wife and children, 500 yards of linen and woolen cloth, the whole from flax of his own raising.* From 500 to 700 yards of cloth in a year were made by families in Newport, Rhode Island.^ In generaliz- ing on the effects of these social gatherings upon the pro- duction of textile fabrics for ordinary clothing, Weeden says: "These impressed the popular mind exceedingly, and turned the skill and industry of the women of all classes to the production of cloth as a domestic business. This social movement was so effective that it ceased to be a matter of record. The people were now clothed in their own gar- ments as naturally as they were fed by their own Indian corn "4 the English goods for the product of their own hands. Sometimes an enthusiast would clothe his appeal in poetical language. In the Massa- chusetts Gazette of November 9, 1767, may be found the following lines (cited by Crawford, Soc. Life in Old N. Eng., p. 268; also Bagnall, op. cit., p. 57): Young ladies in town and those that live round Let a friend at this season advise you. Since money's so scarce and times growing worse. Strange things may soon hap and surprise you. First then throw aside your high top knots of pride. Wear none but your own country linen. Of economy boast. Let your pride be the most To show cloaths of your own make and spinning. ' Bost. Eve. Post, November 2, 1767; cited by Weeden, op. cit., n, 732- ' Bost. News Let., January 7, 1768; Weeden, op. cit., 733. 'Bost. News Lei., January 21, 1768; Weeden, op. cit., 732. 4 Op. cit., II, 789. Status of Household Manufactures 109 This outward opposition to English manufactures and the movement to encourage the production and use of homemade goods were by no means confined to New Eng- land. Since the colonies were practically a unit in opposing the Stamp and other acts of Parliament, there followed a similar unity in resisting them. While efforts equally strenuous as those in New England were not put forth in all of the colonies, yet there is evidence that the problem of encouraging the production of goods in the home was not entirely neglected. Soon after the passage of the Stamp Act a market was established in Philadelphia for the sale of home-manufactured goods. This market was kept open from nine o'clock until noon every Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.' The people of New Jersey were none behind their neighbors. As evidence of this, the following is cited from the New York Journal, January 21, 1768: "As a further Specimen of the Practicability of manufactur- ing our own clothes in this Country, we can assure the Public of the following Persons in Woodbridge in New Jersey, making in their respective Families, within the Year past, both Woolen and Linen of their own raising, the quantities following, viz. Mr. Isaac Freeman, 599 Yards, Mr. James Smith, 567 Yards, and Mr. Nathaniel Heard, 414 Yards."^ Even South Carolina fell into line with her northern sister colonies. A news letter from Charles- ton, dated November, 1768, and printed in the Boston Chronicle, December 5-12, 1768, said in part: "We are informed, the quantity of Hemp made last year is nearly ' Scharf and Westcott, op. cit., Ill, 2227. 'NJ. Archives, ist ser., XXVI, "Newspaper Extracts," VII, i6. no Household Manufactures in the United States double this; that the inhabitants now manufacture most of their linens (such as cost in England from 12 to i8d. a yard) Linsey-Woolsey, and even coarse cloths.'" Virginia's response to the movement to encourage the production and consumption of homemade goods is well illustrated by the spinning and weaving operations on Wash- ington's plantation, where they were carried on in a house built especially for the purpose. An idea of what was done in this establishment^ is gained from an account of the output for the years 1767 and 1768. In the former year weaving was done for twenty-eight different individuals living in the neighborhood. The returns for this work amounted to £18 85. 6d.; the weaving for the plantation this same year totaled £38 25. "jd., making £56 iis. id. for the year's output. The number of yards woven for the use of the plantation was 1,059, for the neighbors, 499, total, 1,558 yards. The cloth fabricated consisted of striped, plaided, and plain woolen, linsey-woolsey, striped and plain cotton, and plain linen.' During the year 1768 the establishment put out 1,355! yards of linsey-woolsey and linen. The weaving of this amount totaled £30 15s. lod. rated at the customary prices."* According to ' Commons (editor), Doc. Hist, of Am. Indust. Soc, 11, 274. "This establishment with its equipment is still (1917) to be seen at Mount Vemon. The writer was much disappointed in its size when he saw it for the first time in February, 1914. From the accounts he had read of the work carried on in it he expected to see quite an establishment, instead of a little, low building of rather small dimensions. ' "Record of the Operations in George Washington's Weaving Estab- lishment for the Year 1767," in Commons, op. cit., II, 322. ■• These rates were: for woolens, the price averaged sid. a yard; for cotton, i4iV-; for Unsey, sd.; and for linen, 4i%d. (ibid., II, 324). Status of Household Manufactures iii Washington's somewhat ambiguous bookkeeping his estab- lishment was run on a losing basis. The output for the year 1767-68 could have been imported at a total cost of £105 "js. ^d. The raw material necessary to make the cloth that this amount would buy and the weaving of it amounted to £76 155. 4J., leaving but £28 115. iid. for the expense of the spinning, which in this case consisted of the hire of one white woman and of the boarding and clothing of five negro girls/ Even though it was run at a loss, as no doubt were those on many other plantations, the years of controversy with England over taxation and the war that followed made necessary an increase, regardless of cost, of the output of all such establishments.' The boycott of the English goods during the year 1768- 69 in the territory north of Maryland was of short duration. The very next year imports returned to their normal con- dition, and in the year 1771-72 they reached a value, in all the colonies but New York, never before equaled.' During the next two years they returned to a little above normal, ' "Summary by Washington of the operations of his weavers in the year 1768," ibid., II, 324. ' It would certainly be wrong to conclude that the sentiment in the South against the use of English goods was as strong as it was in the North. The table of imports from Great Britain for the years 1767-68 and 1768-69 cited in chap, ii clearly shows that, while there was a considerable decline in the imports into the territory north of Maryland during the latter year, there was also a slight increase in all the territory south of Pennsylvania. In fact, the boycott of English goods did not become effective in North and South Carolina, Maryland, and Virginia until 1774-75, and not until 1775-76 in Georgia (see Table II). 3 Macpherson, op. cit.. Ill, 508, 533. 112 Household Manufactures in the United States and not until 1774-75 did another falling off occur. What happened after this date is shown by the tables in chapter ii.' Certain facts exhibited by these tables should be re- called before entering the period of the Revolution proper. They are: (i) that the people of New England, Pennsyl- vania, Maryland, and Virginia were almost completely cut off from the English supply of goods during the war; (2) that New York, beginning with the year 1779, had almost a normal supply, and that the supply was entirely cut off but one year, Christmas, 1775, to Christmas, 1776; (3) that the Carolinas and Georgia, after Christmas, 1779, had almost a normal supply during the remainder of the war, except Georgia in 1782. There is little danger of exaggerating the amount of manufacturing done in the homes and on the plantations during the first three or four years of the Revolutionary War. Bishop estimates that the household industry in New England and some parts of the middle colonies was nearly or quite equal to the ordinary wants of the inhabit- ants for clothing.'' The patriotic sentiment which expressed itself in the making and wearing of homemade goods during the decade beginning in 1765 prepared the people for the real emergency which came with the sudden stoppage of a large supply of English goods that they had previously depended upon. Long before the actual cutting off of this supply the family textile manufactures had come to be a positive factor in the common life and prosperity of the people in New England, the middle colonies, and in the back-country of the South. In the absence of adequate ' Pp. s8 f. ' Op. ciL, I, 390. Status of Household Manufactures 113 textile manufacturing establishments, the homes were the main reliance for this t}^e of goods until the privateers began to bring in their rich prizes and trade relations were established with countries other than England.' Besides providing for their own immediate needs, the homes were called upon to assist in furnishing necessary supplies for the army. Wearing apparel of all kinds was the one great item in these supplies that seemed to be in constant demand throughout the Revolution. The Con- tinental Congress realized quite early in the war that one of the most difl&cult problems to be met was a sure and ample supply of such necessities. In June, 1776, each state was asked to furnish a suit of clothes, a blanket, a felt hat, two shirts, two pairs of hose, and two pairs of shoes for each soldier enlisted therein.^ The general super- vision of the collection of these was intrusted to agents in the states, working under the directions of the Clothier- General with headquarters at Lancaster, Pennsylvania.^ While all states were requested to do their part in this important matter, yet the main dependence for clothing seems to have been on the region north of Maryland. In ' The great amount of goods supplied through privateering should not be overlooked when one is thinking of the sources of manufactured supplies during the latter half of the Revolution. In discussing this point Weeden remarks: "The former commerce of the country was largely super- seded by this trade in irregular but abundant supplies of wares taken from the rich commerce of the enemy. Articles actually needed for the comforts of the household were generally to be had in the marts of trade, and luxuries were not wanting" (op. cit., II, 779). 'Jour. Cont. Cong. (Library of Congress ed.), V, 467. If the state so desired, the breeches and waistcoat could be made of deerskin. nbid.,mi, 120. 114 Household Manufactures in the United States August, 1777, the Clothier-General was directed by Con- gress to make an estimate of the number of blankets, shoes, hose, shirts, etc., that would be needed in the field the coming winter and to apply to the assemblies and to the executive authorities of New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, and Dela- ware for the amounts needed in proportion to the number of inhabitants in each/ The manner of procuring the requisite amount was left to each state. Several methods were used. The general plan followed in Connecticut after 1777 was to request the towns to supply a complete outfit for each of their non- commissioned officers and soldiers in the army.' Massa- chusetts asked each town for a certain number of blankets, coats, shirts, etc.^ At first the selectmen in the towns in New Hampshire were asked to procure blankets and clothing;* later the state voted a certain amount of taxes and per- mitted them to be paid in clothing suitable for the soldiers.' ■ Jour. Cont. Cong., VIII, 611. 'Pub. Rec. of State of Conn. (1776-78), I, 396. 3 Taylor, Hist, of Great Barrington, Mass., 252. * Docs, and Rec. Rel. to State of N.H., VIII, 837 f. s For example, in 1782 New Hampshire voted a tax of £110,000 and received homemade goods in payment therefor at the following values: cotton or cotton and linen cloth f yard wide, 2s. a yard; good tow and linen cloth one yard wide, is. 6d. a yard; good white woolen cloth f yard wide, well milled and sheared once, ys. a yard and poorer quality in propor- tion; good eight-quarter blankets for soldiers, 21s.; linen cloth j yard wide for shirting, 5s., and linen cloth of an inferior quality in proportion; men's yam hose of best quaUty, ss. a pair, and others in proportion; men's neat leather shoes, good, 6^. a pair; good felt hats, ss. each (ibid., p. 927). Status of Household Manufactures "S Rhode Island followed a plan similar to that of Massa- chusetts/ Two or three examples will illustrate how these plans worked out and at the same time show that the homes must have furnished much of the clothing for the soldiers. For instance, Rhode Island about the same date apportioned 3,622 yards of tow cloth and 518 pairs of stockings to the towns, as shown in the following tabulation:' Towns Yards of Tow Cloth Pairs of Stockings Towns Yards of Tow Clotli Pairs of Stodcings Newport Portsmouth Jamestown Middletown. . . . Teverton Little Compton . Providence 182 70 28 42 140 112 252 238 140 210 112 140 84 S6 98 26 10 4 6 20 16 36 34 20 30 16 20 12 8 14 North Kingston . South Kingston. Charleston Westerly Richmond Hopkinton Exeter 182 308 98 1 25 81 112 126 84 S6 28 196 98 98 126 26 44 14 18 12 16 18 Smithfield Bristol Sdtuate Glocester Cumberland. . . . Cranston Johnston North Provi- dence Foster Warren Barrington Warwick East Greenwich. West Greenwich Coventry Total 8 4 28 14 14 18 3>622 S18 In 1781 supplies were furnished the army by the fol- lowing citizens of Dover, Massachusetts: Eleazer Allen, eight shirts; Joseph Draper, one pair of socks; John Jones, three pairs of stockings; Joseph Haven, two pairs of socks; Ebenezer Smith, sixteen pairs of shoes; Ebenezer ' Rec. of R.I. and Providence Planta. (1780-83), IX, S34. ii6 Household Manufactures in the United States Battle, five pairs of socks; Ebenezer Newell, four blankets; John Battle, four pairs of socks; Timothy Allen, one pair of socks; James Draper, stockings; and Captain Ebenezer Battle, sixteen pairs of shoes.' The records of North Brookfield, Massachusetts, show that in February, 1781, 30 blankets, 67 shirts, 67 pairs of shoes, and 67 pairs of hose were sent to the army; and in October, 31 blankets, 62 shirts, and 62 pairs of hose. In February, 1782, 31 blankets, 62 shirts, 62 pairs of shoes, and 62 pairs of hose were sent.^ These supplies were purchased by the towns from the inhabitants — a policy that was much encouraged during the later years of the war. This method kept the money within the state and enabled the people to bear their burdens some- what more easily. Governor Greene was an ardent advo- cate of such a procedure.^ The foregoing examples are sufficient to show that household manufactures were in reality a factor in furnish- ing the Continental army with a supply of clothing, espe- cially in the New England states. Exactly to what extent this was true one cannot estimate from the sources at hand, ' Smith, Hist, of Dover, Mass., p. io8. = Temple, Hist, of North Brookfield, Mass., pp. 244 f. 3 Ibid., p. 503, note. Occasionally a bounty was ofEered for cloth made within the town. On March 7, 1775, the town of Harvard, Massa- chusetts, voted a bounty on cloth made as follows: "One peney half peney pr. yard for alwool cloth men's wair .... being over and above what is intended for the use of the Familyes where it is made Likewise one penney pr. yard for woman's all wool .... and for linnen, and tow, half penney pr. yard" (quoted by Nourse, Hist, of Harvard, Mass., p. 31s). Status of Household Manufactures 117 since no distinction was ever made in the records between that furnished by the tradesmen in a town and the inhabit- ants not so classed. Supplying clothing to the soldiers in the field was but one of the many demands upon the home factory during the years of warfare. There were approximately two and one- half millions' of citizens to be housed, clothed, and fed throughout the period of actual war. The artful pohcy impressed upon the king and Parliament by the English manufacturers had kept the textile industry in the colonies far behind other industries. Thus, when war came, the homes were still the main reliance for clothing and house- hold textiles. The ten years of agitation following 1765, during which time household textile manufactures were greatly augmented, were an excellent preparation for the strenuous times which the first few years of the war brought. The fact that the people had within their own homes the means of supplying their needs for wearing apparel was one of the big factors which enabled them to continue their struggle to a successful termination. To show their response to the demands for ordinary clothing and household fabrics, but a few examples are necessary. Anburey, one of the Saratoga prisoners, was taken through Pennsylvania in 1778. According to his testi- mony there was little suffering at this date in this section. "The Pennsylvanians," he said, "are an industrious and hardy people, they are most of them substantial, but 'Dexter, "Estimates of Population in the American Colonies,'' Proc. Am. Ant. Soc, N.S., V, 50 B. ii8 Household Manufactures in the United States cannot be considered rich, it being rarely the case with landed people. However, they are well lodged, fed, and clad, and the latter at an easy rate, as the inferior people manu- facture most of their own apparel,^ both linens and woollens and are most industrious of themselves, having but few blacks among them.'" Speaking of the women on Nan- tucket Island in about 1780, Crevecouer remarked: "They spin, or cause to be spun in their homes, abundance of wool and flax; and would be forever disgraced, and looked down upon as idlers, if all the family were not clad in good, neat, and sufiicient homespun."^ In fact, these industrious women did more than simply supply their own households with wearing apparel. During the year 1781 Theodora Orcutt, wife of Stephen Orcutt, of Whately, Massachusetts, sold to Parson Wells in exchange for groceries and other household supplies the following:' ■ Trawls through the Interior Parts of Am. (London, 1791), II, 251. While the above sounds much like Edmund Burke's statement written twenty years earlier, yet there is no indication that Anburey copied from him in a wholesale fashion. Here is Burke's account : " The Pennsylvanians are an industrious and hardy people; they are most of them substantial, though but few of the landed people can be considered rich; but they are well lodged, well fed, and for their condition, well clad, too; and this at a more easy rate, as the inferior people manufacture most all of their own wear both linens and woollens'' {An Account of the European Settlements in Am. [London, 1757], II, 199). ' Letters from an Am. Farmer (Philadelphia, 1793), p. 155. 'Temple, Hist, of Whately, Mass., p. 71. A "run'' of yarn consisted of twenty knots. A knot was composed of twenty threads, and a thread was seventy four inches in length, or once around the reel. A "skein" consisted of seven "knots." An ordinary days work for a spinner was four skeins when she carded her own wool; when the wool was carded by a machine, she could spin six skeins a day {ibid., p. 72}. Status of Household Manufactures 119 Sept. 1 1 runs at 7/4 — ^3 runs at yi £0 gs. id. Feb. II 4 " for handkerchiefs 02 4 Mch. 28" Imen yam at 7^ o 4 8 "2 S " tow yarn o 2 8 "61" fine tow yam at 7^ o o 7 " 13 2 " woolen yam o i 4 Apr. 8 13 " tow yarn o 6 11 " " 14 " linen yam at 8i o 9 4 " 29 95 " fine tow yam at 8i o 6 4 May 13 2 " fine thread for stockings at 8i 01 4 "13 4 " fine tow yam at 8d o 2 8 "13 3 " coarse tow yarn at 4(i 01 7 "13 3 " coarse linen yarn at 6i o r 6 June 19 8 " fine yam for lawn o 8 o " 19 22 " coarse linen yarn at 6i on o "24 2 " linen yarn at 8d o i 4 July s 10 " tow yarn at 4 o 5 4 "9 3I " tow yam at 4 o i 10 " II 10 " tow yarn at 6i 05 o "25 3 " fine linen yarn at 8d o 2 o "25 2 " coarse linen at 6i .. 01 o "25 2 " fine tow yarn at 8i o i 4 "31 I " fine tow yam at 8d o o 8 Aug. 24 19 " coarse linen chain o 9 6 Sept. II II " coarse tow yam 01 i II 12 runs tow, 8 runs tow o 6 s £5 45. loi. The people on the frontier from Maine to Georgia were driven by necessity during the years of the Revolution to supply themselves in their homes with practically every necessity of life. Mills for grinding grain, tanneries for making leather, smiths for making and repairing their farming utensils, carpenters, tailors, cabinetmakers, shoe- makers, brewers, and weavers did not generally exist. Professional tradesmen as such were almost unknown. Because of such primitive conditions, each family taimed its own leather and made shoes, shoepacks, hunting-shirts. I20 Household Manufactures in the United States and leggings for its own use; spun, wove, and tailored its textile clothing from wool, flax, or cotton; and supplied itself with farming implements, household furniture, har- ness, wagons, sleds, cooper-ware, etc. While the towns on the coast and along the rivers had access occasionally to supplies from the prize ships and from French shipmasters, the people on the frontier, during the entire period of the war, were practically economically independent. This independence was one of the home rather than of the town or community, as was the case in the older settlements. The amount of all kinds of manufactures produced in the homes can be stated in terms of the actual needs of the family, for its chief dependence was upon the household factory.' As already suggested, the southern planter, prior to 1765, accepted the British policy of maintaining the Ameri- can settlements in economic dependence without serious complaint. It took the Stamp Act controversy and the reign of the non-importation leagues to convince the people of the close connection that existed between industrial and political independence. While the trade between the South and Great Britain during the decade next following 1765 does not indicate that the idea of industrial independence had been unconditionally accepted at the outbreak of the war, yet when the war actually came the planters accepted the situation and began providing on their plantations the necessary articles that they had formerly acquired from England in exchange for their staple products. The be- ginning of such manufacturing on one plantation is thus related by a contemporary writer in his diary: ' Doddridge, op. cit., pp. no £f. Status of Household Manufactures 121 Monday, (October) i6th (1775). This morning 3 men went to work to break, swingle and heckle flax and one woman to spin in order to make course linnen for shirts to the Nigers, This being the first of the kind that was made on the Plantation. An before this year there has been little or no linnen made in the Colony. Tuesday (October), 17th, (1775). Two women spinning wool on the bigg wheel and one woman spinning flax on the little wheel all designed for the Nigers.' This beginning mentioned by Harrower grew to such proportions that by the end of the war Jefferson could say that "in almost every family some [cotton stuffs] is manu- factured for the use of the family, which is always good in quality & often tolerably fine. In stockings of cotton, weaving is in like manner carried on principally in the fa;mily way; among the poor the wife weaves generally, & the rich either have a weaver among their servants or employ their poor neighbors."^ Of the entire southern region, he commented as follows : The four Southernmost states make a great deal of cotton. Their poor are almost entirely clothed in it in winter & summer. In winter they weave shirts of it, & outer clothing of cotton & wool mixed. In Summer their shirts are linnen but the outer clothing cotton. The dress of the women is almost entirely of cotton, manufactured by themselves, except the richer class, and even many of those wear a good deal of homespun cotton. It is as well manufactured as the calicoes of Europe.' ' "Diary of John Harrower, Virginia, 1774, 75," Am. Hist. Rev., VI, 103. ' "Jefferson to Thomas Digges," Works (Fed. ed.), V, 409. The young negroes on the plantation were often employed in weaving. In 1782 Robert Carter, a planter living in the northern neck of Virginia, had six negro weavers in his weaving establishment, also four negro winders, none over nineteen years old (Commons, op. cit., II, 315). 3 "Jefferson to Jean Pierre Brissot de Warville," Works, V, 166. 122 Household Manufactures in the United States A modern writer on southern colonial manufactures concludes thus: The account books and letters of the period show how frequently the planters employed their poorer white neighbors, at spinning and weaving doth, and how they themselves built loom houses and trained their slaves in the household arts.' Hence it becomes evident that household and planta- tion manufactures must have been very important factors in the struggle for both political and economic independence from the mother-country, on whom so much reliance had been placed for all sorts of manufactured commodities before the opening of the war. ' Clark, "Colonial Manufactures," South in the Building of the Nation, V,3ii. CHAPTER IV A QUARTER-CENTURY OF DEVELOPMENTS, 1784-1809 Between 1784 and 1810 household manufactures passed through the following three important stages: (i) a sudden decline of interest in and devotion to them; (2) a quick recovery of this interest and devotion; and (3) the stage in which they became the dominant factor in the struggle for industrial independence. The first few years next following the Treaty of Paris saw a sudden decline in the interest of the people in goods of their own fabrication. However, as soon as they realized the full effects of their "madness for foreign finery," they returned to their former simplicity and economy in life's necessities. This return is evidenced by the amount of commodities of all sorts made in the homes and on the plantations about 1790. As a result of their experience during the hard times follow- ing the establishment of their poUtical independence, the people began to see the need of industrial independence as well. To establish this much-desired condition great reHance was placed in the system of household manu- facturing. In fact, prior to the economic changes brought about by the chain of events which culminated in the War of 18 1 2, this system was the dominant factor in an earnest struggle for economic freedom; for without factories and mills sufl&cient to supply their needs the inhabitants of this newly born nation were forced to rely mainly upon 123 124 Household Manufactures in the United States the home and the small shops for many of their manufac- tured necessities. This was especially true of the southern and western sections of the country during the twenty-five years prior to 1810. A SUDDEN DECLINE AND A QUICK RECOVERY Even before the Treaty of Paris was signed, foreign manufactured commodities began to flood the country. During the year ending at Christmas, 1783, wares were imported from England to the official value of £1,435,407. The same value in pounds for 1784 was 3,697,467; for 1785, 2,308,023; and for 1786, 1,603,466. Not until 1791 did the imports again equal those of 1784.' Since these values were oflSicial, they were considerably less than the real values, which Pitkin estimated for the years 1784 and 1785 at $30,000,000.* The sudden drop in 1786 is sig- nificant. The people had bought beyond their means. Such a vast influx of goods soon took from them a large amount of the specie which they had when the war closed. Hard times followed, all of which brought about a con- siderable decline in the amount of Enghsh as well as other foreign goods consumed. The influx of this large quantity of foreign supplies had a direct effect on household manufactures. The women gave up their wheels and looms, and foreign fabrics took the place of those made in the homes. In the sections of the country where commercial communication made it possible to acquire such luxuries the whole domestic life » Macpherson, Annals of Commerce, IV, 40, 68, 99, 120, 231. 'Statistical View of the Commerce of the U.S. (ed., 1816), p. 30. A Quarter-Century of Developments 125 was entirely changed. Speaking of this matter in his message to the legislature in February, 1786, Governor Bowdoin, of Massachusetts, said: "The quantity of woolens imported, their superior fabric, and the cheapness of them, have not only in a great measure put a stop to our looms, and to the several other modes of manufacturing our wool, but have thereby been a principal cause of the decrease of sheep in this Commonwealth."' The governor asked the Assembly to remedy these conditions. This body, however, must have felt that they would adjust themselves without legislative interference, since no action was taken regarding the governor's request. Massachusetts was not alone in this superabundant supply of foreign manufactures. Similar situations existed in other parts of the country. In addressing an assembly of the friends of American manufactures in Philadelphia on August 9, 1787, Tench Coxe, in speaking of the use and plentifulness of foreign goods, said: An extravagant and wasteful use of foreign manufactures has been too just a charge against the people of America, since the close of the war. They have been so cheap, so plentiful, and so easily obtained on credit, that the consumption of them has been absolutely wanton. To such an excess has it been carried, that importations of the finer kinds of coat, vest, and sleeve buttons, buckles, brooches, breast-pins and other trinkets into this colony [Pennsylvania], is supposed to have amounted in a single year to ten thousand pounds sterling, which cost wearers above 60,000 dollars ' While Coxe felt that it was only "in the towns that the madness for foreign finery raged and destroyed," yet, ' Ads and Laws of the Commonwealth of Mass. (1784-85), p. 840. ' Coxe, A View of the U.S. of Am., pp. 49 f. 126 Household Manufactures in the United States according to the testimony of a farmer living near Phila- delphia, the people in rural districts too had given up their homemade stuffs for the foreign finery. This farmer illustrated the cause of the hard times that were then upon them by citing the change in the "setting out" given each of his three daughters. In 1780, when the first daughter married, she was permitted to take the best wool and flax and make for herself gowns, coats, stockings, and shifts. She was also allowed to buy some cotton and make it into sheets. Two years afterward his second daughter married. For her "setting out" the mother went to town and purchased a calico gown, a calamanco petticoat, a set of stone teacups, a half-dozen pewter teaspoons, and a teakettle — things that had never entered this farmer's house before. Three years later the third daughter married. She had to have a silk gown, silk for a cloak, a looking-glass, china, tea-gear, and other finery.' The change that took place in this farmer's household is representative of what happened between 1780 and 1786 in many sections of the country. In this particular case the mother simply wished to have the "settings out" of her daughters equal to those of other girls in the community. Up to 1780 this farmer had never spent more than ten dollars a year for clothing and household supplies. Nothing to eat, drink, or wear was purchased, as his farm provided all of these necessities. It was his belief that the hard times, of which so many complained in 1787, were caused by the drifting away of the people from their mode of living in 1780. The wheel and loom had come to be used ' Carey, Am. Museum, I, 11. A Quarter-Century of Developments 127 only for the purpose of exchanging the substantial cloth of flax and wool for gauze, ribbon, silk, tea, and sugar, instead of providing textile fabrics for the family's own use/ The "unextinguishable rage for foreign finery" even invaded the Valley of Virginia. In speaking of imports into this section on the close of the war, Kercheval said : Immense quantities of British and French goods were soon imported; our people imbibed a taste for foreign fashions and luxury; and in the course of two or three years, from the close of the war, such an entire change had taken place in the habits and manners of our inhabitants, that it almost appeared as if we had suddenly become a different nation. The staid and sober habits of our ances- tors, with their plain home-manufactured clothing, were suddenly laid aside, and European goods of fine quality adopted in their stead.' The Quakers then living in the Valley were not included in the term "our ancestors." They still continued their ancient custom of depending upon household manufactures for their clothing.* Special efforts were made in some states to call the people back to their former primitive custom of manu- facturing their own clothing and household textiles. In March, 1786, the General Assembly of Rhode Island passed an act for encouraging the growth of hemp and flax within the state. The Assembly took this action because of the great importance to the state of encouraging the growth of all raw materials, more especially, as the 'Ibid., p. 12. ' Kercheval, Hist, of the Valley of Va. (ist ed., 1833), pp. 199 f. ' Iba., p. 202. 128 Household Manufactures in the United Stales preamble claimed, of those that supplied clothing to the inhabitants. One penny a pound was offered for every pound of good merchantable hemp or flax raised in the state during the years 1786 and 1787. At the same session a law was enacted to encourage the growth of sheep in the state.^ Connecticut in the same year provided that there should be deducted from the sum of the total lists of all owners of sheep an amount equal to 45. a head for all sheep owned. By the same act sheep up to the number of twenty were exempted from executions.' Gk)vernor Livingston, of New Jersey, an ardent advocate of homespun, communicated his views on the subject to the public through the pages of the American Museum. In an article published in July, 1791, he made a strong plea to induce the people to stand firmly by their homespun and leave off the European finery. He said in part: By what strange fatality, by what unaccountable, fortuitous concourse of atoms, has our homespun gone out of fashion, in a coun- try that ought to glory in it; and in which its perpetuity annually would have saved thousands of pounds ? O, how I have delighted to behold, in the county of Bergen, piles of this home wrought woollen not only for the dress of my male compatriots, but for the future invest- ment of the delicate limbs of my fair country women This laudable economy was not peculiar to Bergen. It is not long since that the manufacture of our own cloth was very general among the farmers. Why is this practice so generally discontinued at present ? Must we necessarily determine upon a domestic, because we have acquired a political revolution ? And the former as ruinous, as the latter is or may be made advantageous ? ■ R.I. Col. Rec, X, 180, 182. ' Ads and Laws of Conn. (1786), p. 345. A Quarter-Century of Developments 129 The governor attributed the decline of home manufac- turing to what he termed "the unextinguishable rage for foreign finery." He felt that the people had simply gone mad over the fashions of Paris and London. His plea to them to return to their homespun was as follows: To your home-spiin, my fellow citizens. Have the patriotism to disappoint both Gaul and Albion in their arts to drain your every copper for their trifles and baubles. Disappoint both of them in their contest who shall make most of you; and which of them shall soonest ruin you. To your home-spun, I say. And in order to facilitate its fabric, I would advise our farmers to desist from their present practice of selling their best lambs to the butcher; and at the same time urge the utility of exchanging their rams with some distant farmer, every year.^ Influenced partly by such pleas as this one of Governor Livingston and the one by the citizen of Massachusetts, cited below, but more by the lack of means to supply them- selves with foreign goods, many of those who had gone off after the "foreign finery" returned to their homespun before 1790. The spinning bees of 1768 were revived and again became the rage in New England. Sometimes more than a hundred married and single ladies would attend one of these bees, which was usually held at the minister's house. On account of both their social and their economic importance, a full account of one held in Fal- mouth (now Portland), Maine, on May Day, 1788, follows: On the ist instant, assembled at the house of Rev. Samuel Deane, of this town, more than one hundred of the fair sex, married and '"Homespun," Am. Museum, X, 17 f. For a similar plea made to the citizens of Massachusetts, see extracts from an essay entitled "National Arithmetic or Observations on the Finance of the Commonwealth of Massa- chusetts," ibid., V, 358. This was written in 1789. 130 Household Manufactures in the United States single ladies, most of whom were skilled in the important art of spin- ning. An emulous industry was never more apparent than in this beautiful assembly. The majority of fair hands gave motion to not less than sixty wheels. Many were occupied in preparing the materials, besides those who attended to the entertainment of the rest — ^provisions for which was mostly presented by the guests them- selves, or sent in by other generous promoters of the exhibition, as were also the materials for the work. Near the close of the day, Mrs. Deane was presented by the company with two hundred and thirty-six seven-knotted skeins of excellent cotton and Unen yarn, the work of the day, excepting about a dozen skeins which some of the com- pany brought in ready spun. Some had spun six and many not less than five skeins apiece.' The effect of the social movement represented by the spinning bees and the general agitation for economy and frugality throughout the country about 1790 can be seen in the actual output of the home factory at this time. Fortunately some rather definite data were collected on household manufactures about the time the first census was taken. These data are very significant and worth presenting in considerable detail. The following section is devoted to such a presentation. A CROSS-SECTION VIEW ABOUT 179O Two of the best-informed men on the general economic state of the country in 1790 were Tench Coxe and Alexander ' Cumberland Gazette, May 8, 1788; quoted by Kittredge in The Old Farmer and His Almanack, pp. 18 f.; Smith, in his Hist, of Pittsfield, Mass. (1800-1876), pp. S3 f-i quotes from the Pittsfield Chronicle accounts of bees held in July and October, 1788, similar to the one above. Forty-five young ladies were present at the first bee reported, and twenty-four married women at the second. Fifty-five runs of jrarn were spun at the former and twenty-six at the latter. A Quarter-Century of Developments 131 Hamilton. In speaking of household manufactures at this date, Coxe said: The progress and present state of the invaluable branch of the national industry, exceeds every idea of it, it is believed, that has been formed of it, either in this country or in Europe. In all the states inhabited almost entirely by white people, domestic manu- factures are known to be considerable, yielding a considerable surplus for use of other parts of the union." Hamilton, in his famous report on manufactures in 1 791, after enumerating seventeen of the most considerable articles of manufactories, concluded thus: Besides manufactories of these articles, which are carried on as regular trades, and have attained to a considerable degree of maturity, there is a vast scene of household manufacturing which contributes more largely to the supply of the community than could be imagined, without having made it an object of particular inquiry. This observa- tion is the pleasing result of the investigation to which the subject of this report has led, and is applicable as well to the Southern as to the Middle and Northern States. Great quantities of coarse cloths, coatings, serges, and flannels, linsey woolseys, hosiery of wool, cotton, and thread, coarse fustians, jeans, and muslins, checked and striped cotton and linen goods, bed ticks, coverlets and coimterpanes, tow linens, coarse shirtings, sheetings, toweling, and table linen, and various mixtures of wool and cotton, and of cotton and flax, are made in the household way, and in many instances, to an extent not only sufficient for the supply of the families in which they are made, but for sale and, even, in some cases, for exportation. It is computed in a number of districts that two-thirds, three-fourths, and even four-fifths, of all the clothing of the inhabitants, are made by them- selves. The importance of so great a progress as appears to have been made in family manufactures, within a few years, both in a moral and political view, renders the fact highly interesting." ' Op. cit., p. 260. " Am. State Papers, "Finance," I, 132. 132 Household Manufactures in the United States These generalizations were based upon letters and state- ments sent to Hamilton and Coxe when they were collecting data for the report mentioned above. While no house-to- house canvas was made by those who sent in the accounts, yet, judging from their character, they must have been made by well-informed individuals. Since they are the result of the first systematic attempt to gather statistics on household manufactures in the country at large, and at the same time furnish concrete data to substantiate the generalizations made by the Secretary of the Treasury and his assistant, they are worth presenting in some detail, along with certain facts from other sources which serve to validate them and at the same time furnish additional data to justify the generalization cited above. On general conditions in New England, Phineas Bond, consul at Philadelphia to the British Foreign Office, in a special report on manufactures in 1789, said: In the 4 Eastern States viz. New Hampshire, Mass. Bay, Rhode I. and Connect, the people manufacture much larger quantities of woollens for their own use than they did before the war 40,000 yards of coarse New England linen have been sold in Philada within the last year; .... Among the country people coarse linens in Mass. Bay of their own making are in such general use as to lessen the importations of checks and even coarse Irish linens nearly f ds. .... Pearl and potashes are made in great quantities throughout these States.' Such conditions, according to Bond, existed at this time only among the farmers, the people in the towns wearing the European and British goods in preference to ' "Letters of Phineas Bond," edited by Jameson, in Am. Hist. Ass'n Report, 1896, 1, 651. A Quarter-Century of Developments 133 all others/ A few scattering statistics will show that Bond's statement was a fair estimate of household manu- factures in New England in about 1790. In the town of Ipswich, Massachusetts, from August, 1789, to August, 1790, there were 28,496 yards of lace and 13,483 yards of edging manufactured in the family way,' The population of the town at this time was 4,562.' In 1793 Whittemore and Richards of Boston were making 12,000 dozens of cotton and wool cards yearly; and from 2,000 to 3,000 dozens were made annually in other parts of the state.'* These cards were sold to the country people for carding wool and cotton, as carding-machines had not yet come into general use in this country. In the year 1790, 30,000 yards of woolen cloth were made in the town and vicinity of Providence, Rhode Island, in factories and private families, and in the first nine months of 1791 there were manufactured in a family way in the same town 25,262 yards of linen cloth, 5,858 of cotton, 3,165 of woolen, 512 of carpeting, 4,093 pairs of stockings, 859 pairs ' Ibid., p. 634. The Manchester cotton goods were selling at this time (1789) at 25 per cent less than Philadelphia cotton goods. Bond gave the following reasons for the New England preference for home goods: popu- lousness of the country, cheapness of living, and activity and punctuality of the people {ibid., p. 365). ' Hamilton Papers for i^go-iygi, L.C, No. 1545; this is the number of the manuscript in the Library of Congress. Joseph Dana, who reported the above, said that most of the families were waited upon twice by the young ladies who undertook the inquiry. Twenty-two samples of black lace and edging were sent along with the report. These are still in an excel- lent state of preservation. 3 Coxe, op. cit., p. 266. * Fessenden, The Register of Arts, p. 294. 134 Household Manufactures in the United Stales of gloves, and 260 yards of fringe/ In Northfork, Con- necticut, in 1790, twenty-nine families raised and spun 1,200 runs of silk.^ The reports from the various towns in this state sent to Hamilton indicated that family manu- facturing was carried on to a very great extent. For example, 9,800 yards of linen and woolen cloth were made in 1790 in the town of Southington.' Norwich, Middleton, Montville, and Stamford were making in the family way considerable more cloths of various kinds than they used. Some of the surplus was bartered at the village stores and the remainder was sent to the southern states."* In Suffolk four hundred famiUes worked up annually about 10,000 pounds of wool and 20,000 pounds of flax;' and in New London and Cornwall every family wove enough coarse linens and woolens for its own consumption.* Besides clothing, such necessities as sailcloth, bedticks, thread, fringe, silk buttons, hosiery, nails, spikes, sewing- silk, pot and pearl ashes were made. Whatever surplus of these articles existed was sent to the middle and southern states. Commenting on this, Coxe said: "Here then is a surplus of household manufactures sold out of the state. It is an acknowledged fact that New England linens have affected the price and importation of that article from New York to Georgia."' There was as much, or even more, household manufac- turing in the northern part of New England about 1790 ' Coxe, op. cit., p. 267. " The American Pioneer, I, 146. s Ihid., No. 1853. 3 Hamilton Papers, No. 1865. ' Ibid., Nos. 1809-10, 1859. 4 Ihid., Nos. 1813, 1882-83, 1841,1871-72. ' Op. cit., p. 265. A Quarter-Century of Developments 135 as in the southern. A great deal of tow cloth was made in the country towns of New Hampshire, much of which was sent south to clothe the slaves. Pot and pearl ashes were also exported in large quantities.' Every family in Vermont raised a quantity of flax and carried on a small manufacture of linen, and from the wool of their own raising the "bigger part of the farmers manufactured their woolens."^ Much maple sugar was likewise made, forty famiUes in Orange County making 13,000 pounds in 1791.' The average yearly amount made by every family in the outer district was about 250 pounds." The farmers made much of their corn into spirits.^ In Maine "almost every family manufactured wool and flax into cloth, and made farming utensils of evey kind for their own use."* From these concrete data concerning actual conditions in this region it can be observed that the generalizations cited above were not overdrawn, especially in so far as they related to the New England states. Bond made no general summary of the condition of household manufactures in the middle states as a whole in his report on manufactures to the home office in 1789.' Comments on each state separately were made instead. Regarding New York he said: " Coarse woollens and some linens are made among the farmers but these fall infinitely " Winterbotham, View of the U.S., II, ii8. ' Williams, Nat. and Civ. Hist, of Vi. (ed. 1794), pp. 315 f. 3 Winterbotham, op. cit., II, S4- * Williams, op. cit., p. 319. 5 Winterbotham, op. cit., II, S3- ' Ibid., II, 221. ' This is the report mentioned on p. 132. 136 Household Manufactures in the United States short of their own consumption." On conditions in New Jersey he commented as follows: "The manufactures in N. Jersey made in private families are now increasing and the farmers in general paying infinitely more attention to domestic manufactures than they have done since the war. Coarse woollens and coarse linens are made in private families fit only for the use of servants and not in a quantity to supply even them." Of what was being done in Pennsylvania he remarked: "In this state also the farmers raise large quantities of flax and hemp and some wool; their domestic manufactures are of a coarser sort and seldom seen in cities and towns. Tow linens, lindseys, and some sort of coarse linens are attended to with more care and industry than formerly, and in some small quantities offered for sale."^ It was said of Delaware : "In this state as in the neighboring State of Pennsylv', the advancement of domestic manufactures is encouraged, attention is payed to the raising of hemp flax and wool but the articles manufactured bear no sort of proportion to the wants of the laboring part of the people."^ The raw materials, implements, and finished products connected with manufacturing in the household, listed in 44 out of 49 inventories of Ulster County, New York, covering the period from 1788 to 1792, indicate that Bond's estimate was correct, at least for one county. For example, in the 44 itemized inventories, spinning- wheels (kind not designated) appeared 23 times, with total of 44 wheels; woolen wheels, 21 times; small wheels, » Letters, op. cit., p. 652, for New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. ^Ibid., p. 654. A Quarter-Century of Developments 137 g; sheep, 20; flax, 11; weaver's loom, 16; sheep's wool, hatchels, shoe leather, and linen yarn, 3 each; wool cards, reels, and quill wheels, 4 each; yarn (kind not designated) and woolen yam, 5 each; reeds and spool wheels, 6 each; hemp, linen cloth, and warping bars and spools, 2 each; and flannel cloth, wool combs, shoemaker's tools, woolen cloth, cotton yarn, tow yarn, homespun cloth, homespun coats, tow cloth, clock reel, weaver's brushes, spooling- wheel, weaver's spools, weaver's wheel, shuttles, and checks, I each.' Such data show that the people in Ulster County had in their homes both the raw products and the implements necessary to supply their needs for clothing and household textile supphes. The Revolution changed the South from a region depending almost wholly upon the outside world for manufactured commodities to one in which many of such commodities were made by the people in their homes or on their plantations. A few facts from letters written to Hamilton when he was collecting data for his report will substantiate this. For example, the individual reporting on conditions in the two counties on the Eastern Shore of Virginia said: "I suppose that f of the people are clothed in their own Manufactury; Leather Shoes we make cheafly within ourselves and Common Stockings '" Similar conditions existed in other counties of this state. The inhabitants of Princess Anne, Norfolk, and Nanse- mond counties made most of their negro clothing and their coarse cloth. Each family within a radius of ten miles of ' Anjou, Ulster County, N.Y., Probate Records, "Wills," II. ' Hamilton Papers, No. 1886. 138 Household Manufactures in the United States Surry made annually about 200 yards of cloth. At least five-sixths of all the cloth, shoes, and stockings used in these famihes were homemade.* In the counties adjacent to Culpeper the rich planters made a great deal of linen cloth for slaves, as did the middle classes also, while the poorer sort made it for their own wear. The first two classes also made cloth for coverlets, bedticks, and jeans. The rich bought most of their fine shoes and stockings.^ The amount manufactured by each of twenty families in twelve months in King William County (rich and poor indiscriminately taken) is exhibited in Table VII. To show that King Wilham County was not alone in the attention given to household manufactures, an account of the output for one year in another county is submitted (Table VIII). The total value made by the twenty families included in this account was slightly less than that made by the families included in the preceding tabulation. The value of the cloth, stockings, and shoes made by the twenty families included in Table VIII was as follows: linen cloth, $273.75; y^-™ cloth, $143.33; cotton cloth, $980.83; stockings, $130.50; and shoes, $263.33 — making a total of $1,791;. 74, and an average of $89. 59 in each family. The average value in each of the forty families represented in the foregoing tables was $91.75. There were in Virginia (exclusive of Kentucky) in i7t)o, 70,825 families. On the basis of what was made in the forty families from which definite statistics were collected, ' Ibid., Anselm Bailey's report. 'Hamilton Papers, No. 1912. A Quarter-Century of Developments 139 the value of goods made in homes during the year 1790 in this state was $6,498,183.75. If, as was claimed by those reporting,' the situation in the famihes included in TABLE VII Quantity and Value of Cloth and Stockings Made by Twenty Families in King William County, Virginia, from ' JANU.4.RY ±, 1790, to January j., 1791* Heads of No. IN Family 1 Cloth Made Stockings Made Values op Cloth and Stockings Families '■B V 1 in 1 >< Value 1 Value Total .1 CL.U T. Avera J. Ruffin .... S. Ruffin .... D. Pannell . . J. King H. Bagwell . . N. Fox Inn.. Wm. Tawler. B. Lipscomb. M. Towler . . J. Howard. . . S. Howard . . Wm. Starke . J. HoUins . . . Mrs. Aawse . C. Lipscomb . P. Richeson . E. P. Cham- berlayne . . W. Newman. D. Ragsdale. 4 7 4 8 3 3 6 4 5 10 4 4 3 5 3 3 8 3 5 4 9 36 31 23 5 I 14 1 13 5 8 6 2 8 14 14 15 13 43 35 31 8 4 20 5 . 18 10 9 4 II 5 9 S 16 17 19 19 263 468 287 400 127 69 200 68 130 56 52 39 00 33 40 50 147 70 I4S 270 $ 152-25 266.83 164.50 23275 74-25 43-5° 112.50 41 .00 70.83 34-33 29.17 24.08 00.00 21.58 25-75 32.08 95-33 32-50 86.67 163-75 15 37 25 29 7 7 15 6 6 8 3 4 4 8 7 21 8 21 29 $ 10-17 22.85 13-94 19.06 509 5-52 9-31 5-10 S-i° 6.80 2-55 3-40 0.00 3-40 S-Si 5-42 15-70 3-36 13-98 18.22 $162.42 289.68 178.44 251.81 79-34 49.02 121. 81 46. 10 75-93 41-13 31.72 27.48 00.00 24.98 31.26 37-50 III. 03 35-86 100.65 181.97 $12.49 6-73 509 8.12 9.91 12.25 6.09 9.22 4.21 4. II 3-52 6.87 0.00 4-99 3-47 7-50 6.93 2.10 5-29 9-57 Totals . . 96 205 301 2914 $1703-65 260 $174.48 I1878.13 $ 6.23 * £ased on the report of Druiy Ragsdale, Hamilton Papers, No. 1892. The values in the report are given in pounds, shillings, and pence. In expressing these amounts in dollars the values used by Coxe in his View of the United Slates (p. 261) were adopted — f i equaling *3.33i- ' Hamilton Papers, No. 1903. 140 Household Manufactures in the United States the two foregoing tabulations was applicable to the whole of Virginia, this computation is a fair one. It must, however, stand as merely an estimate, since the first census included no statistics on manufactures of any kind, making the checking of such calculations an impossibility. TABLE VIII Account oe Manufactures Made in Survey No; 2 by Twenty Families from the Richest and the Poorest in the Period FROM January i to December 31, 1790* Classes of Four Families in Each Class Linen Clotli (Yards) Yam Cloth (Yards) Cotton Cloth (Yards) Stockings, Different Kinds (Pairs) Shoes, Different Kinds (Pairs) First 187 22s 320 254 109 225 95 24 24 24 700.5 440 296 177 68 51 46 40 28 9 112 Second Third Fourth Fifth 57 38 17 13 Totals.... 1,09s 392 1,681. s 174 237 * Hamilton Papers, No. igog. On the reliability of the data included in this and the preceding table, Coxe commented as follows: "These papers have been obtained under cir- cumstances that justify a reliance on their truth and are believed to be very little variant from the medixun of the state of Virginia" (op. ctt., p. 262). To justify the last half of this statement Coxe cited the facts that during the year lygo in the countira of Accomac and Northampton 315,000 yards of flaxen cloth, 45,000 of woolen, 30,000 of cotton, and 45,000 of linen and woolen, and a quantity of coarse stockings equal to the demand were made in the 2,72g families living in these counties at this date (ibid., pp. 262 f.). The reports from the other southern states indicated that they too were quite generally engaged in household manufacturing. GeneraHzing on the basis of the reports sent him in 1791 from the South, Coxe said: "The family manufactures of the middle and interior counties of Virginia, North Carohna, and the interior counties of Georgia, South Carolina, and Maryland, are said to be greater in value than the articles of foreign manufacture A Quarter-Century of Developments 141 which they use."' The reports from the interior of South CaroHna stated that the inhabitants manufactured entirely in the family as much as they had occasion for of cotton, flaxen, hempen, and woolen goods. It was also evident from the reports from North CaroHna and Georgia that these two states did as much as Virginia and South Carolina.^ But brief mention need be made here of conditions on the frontier settlements of Kentucky and Tennessee about 1790. In the principal stations and towns there were stores in which were kept such articles as nails, calicoes, axes, broadcloth, delftware, silks, furniture, bonnets, lumber, hats, sugar, medicine, whisky, and books, all jumbled together. The women of the country brought their linen, linsey, and jeans and bartered them for tea, ' op. cit., p. 298. A similar statement was made by tlie editor of the American Museum in 1791. This statement occurs in Vol. XI, 231, in the first of a series of articles on "Reflection on the State of the Union." Carey, the editor of the Museum, no doubt based his conclusions on Coxe's state- ment quoted above. 'Ibid., p. 264. Both Bishop and Winterbotham give similar state- ments regarding South Carolina. The former states that in about 1790 the planters began generally to clothe their slaves with homespun from the produce of their cotton fields. The material was prepared for the spindle by the field hands, spun in the family, and then sent to the nearest weaver (Hist, of Am. Manufactures, II, 2j). Winterbotham says: "Late accounts from the interior parts of this State inform us, that the inhabitants manu- facture, entirely in the family way, as much as they have occasion for; that cotton hemp and flax are plenty; that they have a considerable stock of good sheep; that great exertions are made, and much done in the house- hold way; that they have long been in the habit of doing something in family manufactures, but within a few years past, great improvements have been made. The women do the weaving and leave the men to attend to agriculture" (op. cit., Ill, 255). 142 Household Manufactures in the United States coffee, and such articles as they could not make them- selves. The store sold few things that could be pro- duced in the home.' These conditions were common on the older frontier everywhere. Since they will be treated separately elsewhere, no further note will be made of them here. From the concrete data presented above it is evident that the general statements of Coxe and Hamilton quoted at the beginning of this section were not overdrawn. When the people returned to their home manufactures after their sad experience with foreign commodities, they did it with a conviction that industrial dependence was as detrimental to their prosperity and happiness as political. Before the general establishment of mills and factories the household was the big factor in attaining the industrial independence so much needed and desired. During the two decades next following 1790 the family factory was certainly the dominant element in the struggle for inde- pendence of foreign mills, especially in the matter of clothing and household textile supplies. HOUSEHOLD MANUFACTURES THE DOMINANT FACTOR IN THE STRUGGLE FOR INDUSTRIAL INDEPENDENCE Industrial and political conditions in the two decades next preceding 18 10 were on the whole conducive to sus- taining and increasing household manufacturing. The uncertain trade relations between the United States and England, the quasi-war with France in 1798, the unfavor- 'Durrett, "Condition of Kentucky Wlien Siie Began Statehood," Filson Club Pubs., No. 7, p. 84. A Quarter-Century of Developments 143 able balance of trade/ Jefferson's embargo policy,^ and the westward movement of population, all tended to force the people to depend more or less upon the homes and plantations for many of the necessities of life. Of all these influences the last two were the most potent. The embargo policy cut off, not only the manufactured supplies which had been coming from England and France, but also the proceeds from the staple articles that the farmers had been sending to these countries. As the frontier moved westward the distance to a market both for raw materials and for manufactured goods became greater and greater. In reality it was as far from the Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, and Tennessee frontiers in 1810 to the eastern markets as it was from the colonies to the English markets during the colonial period. The lack of a market for the products of the frontier and the high cost of imported articles forced the people to become almost industrially independent. At first this was a household independence, later a community one. The condition at ' During the seven years next following 1795 there was a balance of trade against the United States amounting to $106,609,363, or $15,229,909 per annum (Seybert, Statistical Annals, p. 277). For the trade relations of the United States with each of the important countries of the world during these seven years, see ibid., pp. 276 f. ' During the early stages of the embargo and non-intercourse policy the inhabitants of Richmond, in a public gathering, adopted, among other patriotic resolutions, one saying that they would dress in domestic fabrics. Mordecai, commenting on this, said: "As homespun 'was the only wear,' the price of coarse mixed Virginia cotton cloth was a dollar or more a yard for such now [1866] is worth twelve or eighteen cents, and many of our citizens who could afford it ... . were thus arrayed from head to foot" (Va., Especially Richmond, in By-gone Days, p. 320). 144 Household Manufactures in the United States any one time in a community was determined by the status of the handicraft system and by the character of the frontiersmen. Except in extreme frontier communities separated from the base of supplies by inadequate transportation faciKties, New England before 1810 had passed into the shop stage of manufacturing in most every manufactured article except clothing. The women of the household refused to permit the professional spinners and weavers to usurp the traditional adjunct to their household duties. Goodrich's account of general industrial conditions in Ridgefield, Connecticut, in 1800, which, as he asserted, was a typical New England town containing about two hundred famiUes, nearly all farmers, portrays fairly well the amount of manufacturing going on in the homes and the amount done by the tradesmen at this date in this entire region. There was a butcher who went from house to house to slaughter the cattle and swine of his neighbors. There were a tanner, a tailor, a weaver, and a shoemaker, all in the itinerant stage. The weaver went from house to house, put up his loom, and threw his shuttle till the season's work was done; twice a year the tailor came to the house and made the semiannual stock of clothes for the men and boys; upon due notice the circulating shoemaker came with his bench, lapstone, and awl, converted some room into a shop until the household was duly shod, the leather used being that sent back from the tanner from the hides of the cows and calves that the family had killed for meat. The hatter, whose craft was one stage in advance of the foregoing ones, had a place of business and made hats to A Quarter-Century of Developments 145 order in exchange for skins of foxes, rabbits, muskrats, and other chance peltry. The furniture was made by the village cabinetmaker and the fuller dyed and fulled the woolen cloth. Of the manufacturing done in the homes, Goodrich tells us that the people raised their own flax, rotted it, hackled it, dressed it, and spun it. The little wheel, turned by foot, had its place, and was as familiar as if it had been a member of the family. The wool was also spun in the family, partly by his sisters and partly by Molly Gregory, daughter of their neighbor, the town carpenter. Sugar was often made, but most of the supply came from the West Indies. The carpets were all homemade. Soap and candles were also made in the home. The woolen cloth was sent to the fuller to be dyed and fulled, while the linen was bleached and made up in the family.' 'Recollections of a Life Time, I, 64, 71, 72, 74. The picture of North Brookfield, Massachusetts, quoted from Dr. Snell's description of the town in 1798, when he settled in it, by Temple (Hist, of North Brookfield, pp. 267 ff.), shows that the foregoing was not an isolated case. There were about a thousand people in the town at this date. These were nearly all husband- men. What few mechanics there were, were also farmers upon a large or small scale. Among these half-mechanics and half-farmers were a black- smith, a nail-maker, a gunsmith, wheelwrights, carpenters, coopers, cobblers, peeled broom-makers, and tailors. The cobblers had a bench in their kitchen and would also go around to the farmers' houses in the fall with their kit and stay a week or so, mending and making the family supply of shoes. The father or grandfather was still making most of the brooms. The wheelwright made ox-cart wheels, axles, anti tongues, the remainder of the cart being made by the farmer. The carpenter had little to do, because every thriving man could hew, mortise, and lay shingles. The spinning, weaving, and dyeing were still done in the households. Every family owned a great and a httle wheel as weU as a loom. The dyepot was still in the chimney comer. Soap was made in every family. There were 146 Household Manufactures in the United States In going through New England in 1806, Melish made note of the household manufactures. According to his observations, the farmers of Connecticut and their families were generally dressed in cloth of their own manufacture, which was both substantial and good.' In the interior of Massachusetts there was a vast variety of family manu- factures.* Of New Hampshire he remarked: "The country people generally manufacture their own clothing, also at this time, a potter, a sieve-maker, and four cider-mills. For condi- tions in Maine from 1800 to 1810, see Bourne, Hist, of Wells and Kennebunk; and Emery, Hist, of Sanford. Memories of the conditions portrayed were yet fresh when Bourne wrote his account. • Trawls in the U.S. of Am., p. loi. ' Ibid., p. 93. That Melish's general statements are substantiated by the actual conditions is seen by what was made in Berkshire County, Massachusetts, in 1808. Of woolen goods there were 55,212 yards made ia ten of the thirty towns of the county. The towns were: Lenox, 3,030 yards; Lanesboro, 5,000 yards; Hinsdale, 2,000; Sandisfield, 5,441; Cheshire, 6,960; Pittsfield, 15,270^; Great Barrington, 4,400; Stockbridge, 3,250; Tryingham, 5,450 (estimated); Alford, 4,400 (estimated). It was esti- mated by the Pittsfield Sun, which gathered this information, that the total product of the Berkshire looms was at least 100,000 yards. In commenting on this fact the editor said: "Here then in a single branch of manufacture, carried on principally in the private families, at a very trifling expense, and interfering very little with the great business of the farmer, which yields to this small county — consisting by the last census of about 33,000 souls — more than $100,000, being more than three dollars to each person of all ages and sexes. It is easy to see how greatly the wealth, comfort and hap- piness of our country are promoted by pursuits of this sort, and how far they tend to increase and invigorate the solid sinews of national wealth. It is equally obvious to see how easy it would be for our farmers to double the amount of this branch of manufactures in quantity, even by the increase of the conunon wool of our country; and equally to quadruple it in value, by cultivating the finer species of wool, which is not happily brought within the reach of everyone" (quoted by Smith, Hist, of Pittsfield, p. 177). A Quarter-Century of Developments 147 and make considerable quantities of tow cloth for expor- tation";' and of Vermont: "The principal manufactures are of the domestic kinds, consisting of wool and flax, for the family use."^ The people in the middle states were probably as active as those in New England in household manufacturing during the two decades under consideration. In going through New Jersey in 1807, Melish was led to remark: "The inhabitants of New Jersey, except in the towns, make the greater part of their clothing."' Of Pennsylvania ' Travels in the U.S. of Am., p. 84. " Ibid., p. 86. This statement is substantiated by facts gathered in 1809. In October of this year the General Assembly of Vermont appointed a committee composed of one member from each county to prepare a state- ment of the manufactures of the state. The following is the report of the committee on cotton, linen, and woolen goods made in the homes during the year ending October, 1809: Counties Bennington Windham Rutland Windsor Addison Orange Chittenden Caledonia Franklin Orleans Essex and Grand Isle. Totals Cotton and Woolen Clothier's Carding- Linen Goods Goods Works Machines (Yards) (Yards) (Number) (Number) 84,110 62,900 n 9 120,000 100,000 24 16 170,000 143,040 26 18 269,ogo 134,04s 34 25 127,600 107,200 15 13 177,000 177,000 '2 '? 128,000 110,000 8 8 135,000 no,ooo 12 lO 32,600 40,400 7 10 33,000 30,000 4 4 28,960 28,960 3 3 1,305,360 1,043,545 160 135 The committee omitted hosiery from the above. It was claimed that every article made from wool, cotton, or flax was made in nearly sufficient quantities for the common use of the family {Rec. Gov. and Council of Vt., V, soo). 3 0p.Ctt., p. 113. 148 Household Manufactures in the United States he said: "Domestic [family] manufactures are general throughout the state.'" In his message to the General Assembly in 1808, Governor Mitchell, of Delaware, recom- mended the countenancing by law, so far as it could be done without too much interference and regulation, every species of family manufacture.^ While the Delaware legislature took no action respecting this recommendation, yet the Assembly of New York this same year did take up the matter and passed a law to encourage rather than regulate the industry.^ This law provided for a premium of $80 to any person who in his family manufactured within any of the counties of the state the best specimen of woolen cloth of imiform texture and quality containing not less than 30 yards and not less than three-quarters of a yard in width. The county judges were to determine by a majority vote to whom the premium should be awarded each year.'' In 1810 this law was enlarged to include premiums for the three best pieces of the same kind of cloth. The premiums were $40, $35, and $30. The amount of cloth required for each was 30, 25, and 20 yards.5 The effects of these acts are seen in Tables IX and X (pp. 150-51 and 152). " Travels in the U.S. of Am., p. 132. 'Jour, of the H.R., Del, 1808, p. 16. 3 It should be said for Delaware that in 1809 sheep were exempted from taxation. Ten or less could not be seized for debt. The act was to continue for five years {Laws of Del. [printed by M. Bradford and R. Porter], IV, 267) . * Laws of N.Y., 31st Sess., c. 360. 5 Ibid., 33d Sess., c. 108. In June, 1812, the act of 1810 was renewed for three years (ibid., 3Sth Sess., c. 230), and in 1817 the act of 1812 was revived, but was repealed in 1819 (ibid., 40th Sess., c. 240, and 42d Sess., A Quarter-Century of Developments 149 These two tables furnish evidence of the interest in, and results of, household manufactures in New York during a period of more or less forced economic inde- pendence. While they do not exhibit the amount made in each county, yet they do show that the custom was common throughout the state. The few general citations respecting the extent to which the industry was carried on in the other middle states and New England suggest that the facts indicated by the tables were not restricted to New York. Household manufactures were in a flourishing condition in the southern states during most of the two decades next preceding 1810, the embargo pohcy and the general trade conditions being conducive to the fostering of them during this period. As Isaac Weld passed through the Upper Neck of Virginia (between the Potomac and the Rappahannock) in 1796 he noticed that nearly every article that could be wanted by the planters was made or pro- duced upon the principal estates. In this region the slaves were instructed in the business of smiths, carpenters, wheelwrights, turners, tanners, weavers, etc. From, the cotton grown on the plantations a sort of nankeen was made by the negroes.' Other regions of the South were c. 230). These laws were the result of work done by the Society for the Promotion of Arts in New York. In 1807 this society voted one Walter Briggs, of Schoharie County, a piece of silver plate in consideration of his having laid before the society five specimens of woolen cloth of superior quality, made from the wool of his flock, consisting of about 300 sheep. About 1,200 yards of cloth were made annually by the daughters of Mr. Briggs {Trans. Albany Inst., IV, 114). Out of this incident grew the notion of having the state offer money premiums for similar products; hence the law of 1808 mentioned above. ' Travels through the U.S. and N.A. (4th ed., 1800), p. 114. ISO Household Manufactures in the United States TABLE IX Distribution by Counties of Premiums Awarded in New York State UNDER the Acts of April 8, 1808, April s, 1810, AND June 19, 1812* Counties Albany Allegany Broome Cajrugi Chenango. . . . Clinton Columbia. . . . Cortland Delaware. . . . Dutchess Essex Franklin Genesee Greene Herkimer Jefferson Kings Lewis Madison Montgomery. Oneida Onondaga . . . . Ontario Orange Otsego Queens Rensselaer. . . . Rockland. . . . St. Lawrence. Saratoga Schenectady. . Schoharie. . . . Seneca Steuben Suffolk Sullivan Number of Premiums In 1S09 1810 1811 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 I 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 I 3 I 3 3 3 3 I 1813 1814 Amount of Premiums In xSog ( 80 80 80 80 80 80 130 80 80 80 "80 80 80 "80 "So 80 . 80 80 "80. 230 "80 80 80. 1810 $ 80^ 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 230 80 80 130 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 180 80 80 80 "80 t8ii lOS los lOS 180 , los loS 105 los (?) i6s loS los los los los loS los los loS loS los los los 7S loS los los 40 los 40 los los los los 40 1813 $ ios5 1814 30. los los 40 6s loS loS loS 75 75 105 los 105 75 345 los 105 35 105 40 105 30 105 los 23s 70 105 75 40 105 40 40 los los 22s 105 105 105 105 105 215 105 los 105 75 los A Quarter-Century of Developments TABLE IX.— Continued 151 Number of Ptemiums In Amount of Premiums Id 1809 1810 i8n 1813 1814 1809 18 10 1811 18 13 18 14 Tioga Ulster Warren I I I 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 80 180 80 los n 75 Washington. . Westchester . . I I I 3 80 (?) 40 lOS Total 2S 32 103 63 80 $2,300 $2,860 $3,695 $2,460 $3,o8s * Trans, of the Albany Inst., IV, 124. For a list of tlie persons who received tlie premium awarded by the county judges, see ibid., pp. 117 ff. The specimens are preserved in the Institute library. They are arranged in five volumes. Each volume contains the returns for one year. The law of 1810 ex^iired at the end of i8n. There were no premiums for the year 181 2. There were no premiums awarded in Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, New York, Niagara, Putnam, and Richmond counties. equally as busy as Virginia in this plantation manu- facturing. Maryland in 1803 exempted from public assessment all homemade wares in the hands of the makers. Plantation utensils and working tools of mechanics and manufacturers were exempted at the same time.' Nor was South Carolina behind Virginia and Maryland. In his view of this state about 1800, Drayton said: Hence, where the population of the state is convenient to commerce, the manufacturing business is not at all entered into; impor- tations from abroad supplying all the necessary wants. But, as trans- portation is more difficult to, and from, the middle and upper country; so necessity has, in a proportionate degree, compelled the inhabitants to provide for their respective wants. And thus a domestic spirit of manufacturing has arisen, which must prevail in those parts of the state. The traveller there, soon becomes accustomed to the humming music of the hand spinning-wheel; and the industry of the loom often meets his eye. Cottons are thus made, both striped, figured ' Maxcy, Laws of Md., Ill, no. 152 Household Manufactures in the United States and plain, of ingenious fabrications; as well for clothes, and the table, as for house use; woollens also of strong nature and decent appearance, are woven and dressed by suitable fulling-miUs; coarse linens, blanketing, wooUen bed covers and cotton rugs, are also manu- factured. With the exception of salt and sugar, the people, in the upper part of the state may be considered independent of foreign support.' TABLE X General Summary of Premiums Awarded by the Society for the Promotion of Useful Arts in New York and by the County Judges, under the Acts of 1808, 1810, and 1812* Premiums Awarded by Premiums Awarded by the County Judges ToTAi BY Society AND County LVears THE SoaETY Number Of Amount Judges Number Amount Firsts Seconds Thirds Number Amount 1809 1810 1811 1813 1814 t 6 S S $ 4SO 45° 420 370 240 2S 32 39 22 32 33 22 2S 31 19 23 $ 2,300 2,860 3,69s 2,460 3,08s 29 36 109 68 8S $ 2,750 3,310 4,iiS 2,830 3,32s Total. . . 24 $1,930 ISO 80 73 $14,400 327 $16,330 * Trans, of the Albany Institute^ TV, 123. The form used by the Society in awarding premiums was as follows: "state of NEW-YORK "181- "By the Society for the Promotion of Useful Arts, TJiis premium is warded to ... . of the County .... for the best (or as the case may be) specimen of Woollen Cloth, of family manufacture, exhibited the present year" (Trans. Soc. for the Promotion of Useful Arts, III, 249). In going through North Carolina in 1807, Melish noted that practically all of the families in the country manu- ' A View of S.C. (Charleston, 1802), p. 150. Ramsay in his History of South Carolina gives a similar word-picture of the conditions about 1808. He says: "Where slaves abound and the staple commodities are raised in the greatest plenty, the least attention is paid to the domestic manufacture A Quarter-Century of Developments 153 factured their own clothing, so that the "British trade," as he remarked, "to this state is not great or important."^ Similar conditions were observed in Georgia. After a day and a half's journey out of Savannah toward Augusta a stop was made at a farmhouse for dinner. On hearing the noise of a wheel upstairs the traveler went up and found the daughter of the landlord spiiming the rolls of cotton which a negro girl was busy carding. On inquiry of the mistress of the house he found that this family, as well as all other families in the neighborhood, spun cotton all the year round and got the yarn woven into every article necessary for family use, such as sheeting, shirting, toweling, tablecloths, gowns, petticoats, aprons, caps, pantaloons, vesting, and summer coats for the men's use— besides sofa-cloths, fringes, tassels, hosiery, etc. "I examined," said he, "the yarn and cloth and found the fabrics sub- stantial and durable. The cloth was neatly manufac- tured, and some of the articles were handsome. I saw o£ articles of clothing. If the crop succeeds and afterwards sells for a good price, there is money to buy clothing; but if either fails, the reverse takes place, and no provision is made against the pinching of a cold winter. The least wealthy are generally the most provident. The loom and the wheel are most steadily plied among the minor planters or farmers Among such domestic manufactures now are and for a long time have been carried on for almost every necessary family purpose Wool, cotton, and flax, either combined or separate, are worked up into plain garments for warmth, but are seldom made of so fine a texture as to be suitable for summer wear. Though domestic manufactures are daily increasing in quantity and improving in quality, and are carried on, especially in the interior parts of the state, to so considerable an extent that their aggregate is very great, yet they are far short of a sufl&ciency for the supply of the inhabitants" (II, 2S7 f-)- ' Op. cit., p. 189. 154 Household Manufactures in the United States that this family was 'independent of commerce,' and this was the first impression that I had received as to the importance of the domestic manufactures of America."' At Sparta he was informed that there was no demand at all for British goods and that all the people were clothing themselves in homespun/ Victor Clark summed up con- ditions in the South a decade or so prior to 1810 very adequately when he said: Therefore prior to the War of 1812, the advance of Southern manufacture was principally in what were then household arts — those that produced for the subsistence of the family rather than for an outside market. These manufactures continued generalized and dispersed rather than specialized and integra,ted. There is httle evidence even of that rudimentary localization that for a century and a half had characterized some industries in New England and Pennsylvania. This did not indicate stagnation but rather an adapta- tion of manufactures to the economic constitution of Southern society. In their aggregate these manufactures were for a time considerable; but they were so distributed and combined with other productive activities as to lose their identity in contemporary records.^ The people west of the Alleghany Mountains during the period under discussion were forced by the exigencies of the times and the general inconveniences connected with pioneer life to make in their homes or small com- ' Ihid., p. 40. 2 Ihid., p. 263. Melish spent a night at a farmhouse about half-way between Sparta and Greensburg. Of his experiences here he said: "On reaching the house, I found the family aU busily employed in manufacturing, and they showed me a number of articles, which were very good, some of them handsome. They told me that, besides supplying the family, they made a considerable quantity of goods for sale." 3 "Colonial Manufactures," op. cit., V, 312. A Quarter-Century of Developments 155 munities nearly all the necessities of life. Imports into the country were attended with difficulty, great expense, and risk. The impossibility of getting their raw materials to the Atlantic states from which they had their supply of European goods made the balance of trade continually against them/ In 1805 it cost fifty cents to carry a hundred pounds twenty miles.^ For this reason there was not a single species of product except ginseng, beeswax, and saltpeter that would Justify the expense of land carriage to the eastern market.' From the period of the first settlement down to 1803 this region was in almost complete isolation so far as commercial relations were concerned. As long as the Spaniards held the mouth of the Mississippi, it was practically useless for the farmers to cultivate the soil beyond what was needed for their own consumption. But after the purchase of Louisiana trade conditions became more favorable when the inhabit- ants found an unobstructed market for their ginseng, flax, hemp, iron, pork, lard, lumber, furs, cotton, deerskins, and flour down the Mississippi. With the proceeds from the sale of these staples they could buy European goods from the eastern markets. This favorable situation was somewhat upset by the Embargo Act and the trade condi- tions following it. From the passage of this act in 1807 to the close of the War of 1812 these western people had to shift largely for themselves. They were forced to manu- facture in their homes sufficient to supply their daily ■ Ellicott, Journal, p. 24. "Lippincott, "Pioneer Industry," Jour. Pol. Econ., XVIII, 270. » Reynolds, My Own Times, p. 13. iS6 Household Manufactures in the United States needs or to set up manufactures in small villages. The latter was done on a considerable scale in Cincinnati, Lexington, Louisville, Nashville, and Pittsburgh.' Until there were set up in these local communities beyond the mountains gristmills, sawmills, hat factories, fulling-mills, distilleries, breweries, blacksmith-shops, wagon-shops, shoeshops, etc., the pioneer farm was a little world of its own. There was nothing in daily use except salt, lead, and powder that was not made from the products of the farm. The food, clothing, furniture, and agricul- tural implements were the products of this independent household. The farmer was his own cabinetmaker, tan- ner, brewer, distUler, shoemaker, harness-maker, hatter, tailor, and blacksmith. His tools were simple and often rude. At first he had only the ax and the auger. Later he added the drawing-knife, broadax, cross-cut saw, and awl and last. _With these he made everything he needed on the farm. He stocked his plow, mended or made his wagon, made his ox-yokes, harness, shoes, tables, bed- steads, and chairs.^ His whole life for the first dozen or so years was taken up with providing for himself and his family food, clothing, and shelter. The history of a typical pioneer community is chiefly an account of the efforts to provide thfese necessities. Until trade relations were established with older communities the household was practically self-supporting. Ways and means had to ' For an account of these manufactures in Lexington in 1806, see Cuming, Tour of the West; in Tliwaites, Early Western Travels, IV, 185 ff. See ako Melish, op. cit., pp. 315, 361, 403. ' Hall, Romance of Western History, p. 239. A Quarter-Century of Developments 157 be thought out and operated on the farm to supply the daily needs. Of the trinity of pioneer necessities, clothing was the most difficult to secure. The duty of transforming the raw materials into suitable wearing apparel and household supphes fell principally upon the women. A pioneer woman's work was never done. The day was not sufficient for her to perform all her duties. She was often compelled to work late into the night. The product of her strenuous labors Was much the same in all new communities, for the dress of the American pioneers bore a striking similarity. This dress has been minutely described by one whose knowledge was first-hand, as follows : Home-made wool hats were the common wear. Fur-hats were not common and scarcely a boot was ever seen. The covering of the feet in winter was mostly moccasins made of deer-skin, and shoe- packs of tanned leather. Some wore shoes, but not common in very early times. In the summer, the greater portion of the young people, male and female, and many of the old, went barefooted. The sub- stantial and universal outside wear was the blue linsey hunting shirt. .... It is made with wide sleeves, open before, with ample size, so as to envelop the body in its folds, almost twice aroxmd. Sometimes it has a large cape, which answers well to save the shoulders from the rain. A belt is mostly used, to keep the garment close and neatly around the person, and nevertheless, there is nothing tight in it to hamper the body. It is often fringed, and at times the fringe is composed of red, and other gay colors. The belt frequently is sewed to the hunting-shirt. At times, a belt of leather with a buckle sewed to one end is used. Many pioneers wore the white blanket-coats in winter They are made loose, and a cap or cape to turn over the head in extreme cold weather The vest was mostly made of striped linsey. The colors were made often with alum, copperas, and madder, boiled with the bark of trees, in such a manner 158 Household Manufactures in the United States and proportion as the old ladies prescribed. The shirts wore by the Americans were usually home-made of flax and cotton material. .... The flax and cotton were raised at home, and manufactured into shirts. Looms and flax brakes were at that day quite common, and cotton-gins made of wooden rollers The pantaloons of the masses were generally made of deer-skins and linsey. Coarse blue cloth was at times made into pantaloons. At that day, the factory-goods did not exist.' The foregoing description of the clothing of the pioneer is applicable mainly to the first few years of his life on the frontier. Phelan says that by 1800 in some parts of Tennessee calico, chintzes, coarse woolen cloths, and bleached linen had taken the place of the leathern apron and the moccasin among the women. The men were a little slower, yet after a time vests, pants, and shirts, made of deerskin worn next to the person were discarded, and also the coonskin and other fur caps. The hunting-shirt ' Reynolds, op. cit., pp. 43 f. Reynolds came from Tennessee to the region around Cahokia and Kaskaskia, Illinois, about 1800. He describes things as he himself saw them. Other accounts of the clothing of the time substantiate his description. In speaking of the early conditions of the settlement on the Little Hockhocking River at Belpre, Ohio, Hildreth says: "Whole households from the oldest to the youngest, were clad in dressed deer skins. Some of them possessed great skill in making them soft and pliable, equal to the finest cloth. Before the introduction of sheep, buck- skin pantaloons were in general use by all the farmers' boys. The New England settlers, with most of the frontier inhabitants, made cloth of various materials. For the first two or three years, hemp was raised in small quan- tities, water rotted, and manufactured into cloth by the industrious females of the garrison. Flax was also raised.- Nearly every family had their spinning-wheels and looms. With these the girls and young women used to congregate in companies of ten or fifteen in the spacious rooms of the block houses, and cheer each other at their labors, with song and sprightly conversation" {Pioneer History, p. 392). A Quarter-Century of Developments 159 lingered for some time yet, as did the leggings and moccasins. Leather thread for leathern garments gave place to cotton and flax thread.' When F. A. Michaux went through Kentucky and Tennessee in 1802 he noted that in Kentucky the women were exchanging their homemade linen for goods impprted from Europe. It was his observation that these linens, though coarse, were of a good quality, and worn principally by the inferior inhabitants, the others giving a preference to Irish linens, which at that time comprised a considerable share of their commerce.'' Of Tennessee he said: The cottons that are manufactured in West Tennessee are exceed- ingly fine, and superior in quality to those I saw in the course of my travels. In this part as well as in Kentucky, the higher circles wear in summer time, as much from patriotism as from economy, dresses made of the cottons manufactured in the country. At the same time they are convinced that it is the only means of preserving the little specie that is in the country, and of preventing its going to England.3 By 1810 the older settlements in these two states and those in Ohio had settled down to a life much like that beyond the mountains whence they had come. Cincinnati, Lexington, and NashvUle had developed to thriving trading centers. Manufactured goods were brought into these states from Baltimore and Philadelphia, while most of their raw products found a market down the Missis- sippi River. Even as early as 1806, when Ashe visited ' Hist, of Tenn., p. i8o. = Travels to the West of the Alleghany Mountains, Thwaites, op. cit., p. 241. 3 Thwaites, op. cit., p. 278. i6o Household Manufactures in the United States Lexington, Kentucky, he found that the chief business was ordering "immense quantities of goods from Philadel- phia and Baltimore, and in bartering the same through the state for produce which was forwarded to Frankfort and Louisville by land, and from thence to New Orleans by water." At this time, according to Ashe's observations, "the people in these regions were furnished with an abundant supply of every article found in the first markets of Europe, except fish."^ Ashe probably saw these settle- ments at a most favorable time — just before the passage of the Embargo and Non-Intercourse acts, which cut off the supply of European goods. Yet it should be said that on the cutting off of this European supply the towns mentioned above set to manufacturing many of the most needful articles, hence the reversion to the household industries was necessary chiefly in the line of wearing apparel and household textile supplies. But brief mention need be made here of the newly acquired territory of Louisiana. According to Stoddard, at the time of the transfer of this territory to the United States a small quantity of cotton was manufactured along the coast into quilts and cottonades. Most families in the neighborhood of New Orleans and in the settlements, especially at Point Coupee, on the Red River, and in the Attakapas and Opelousas, spun and wove such articles of clothing as were necessary for their slaves. The people found on experiment that this sort of manufacturing was of great value, and began pretty generally to train some of their women and girl slaves to spin and weave and some ' Travels, p. 193, both references. A Quarter-Century of Developments i6i of their men to do blacksmith and carpenter work.' In the upper part of what is now Louisiana, according to the same author, "the inhabitants generally cultivated a sufficient quantity of cotton for family purposes, spun and wove it into cloth. They were unable to defray the expense of foreign manufactures; the prices of which in these upper regions were very exorbitant."^ These foreign manufactures were plentiful in New Orleans at this time. The imports into this city in 1802 consisted of some 202 different items, including everything anyone could wish either for comfort or for luxury .^ It was only a lack of the means of exchange for factory-made goods that forced home manufacturing upon these people. In this they dif- ered from the people on the extreme frontier. The general conditions of household manufactures during the closing days of 1809 is exhibited in a report on the subject, "American Manufactures," sent to the House of Representatives on April 19 of this year by Secretary of the Treasury Gallatin, in comphance with a resolution of this body.'' The brief time allowed for compihng such a report prevented an exhaustive investigation, yet from certain sections of the country considerable data were secured by the Secretary. For example, the report from ' Sketches of La., p. 304. ' Ibid., p. 305. Speaking of conditions in this region at the same date, Martin said: "There were but few domestic manufactures. The Acadians wrought some cotton into quilts and homespun, and in the more remote parts of the province, the poorer kind of people spun and wove the wool mixed with cotton, into coarse cloth" {Hist, of La., p. 317). 3 For an itemized list with quantity for each, see Martin, op. cit., p. 311. 4 For the text of the report, see Am. State Papers, "Finance," II, 426 ff. i62 Household Manufactures in the United States New Hampshire said that in almost every town (of six miles square or a district containing one or more towns) having a population of 200 or 300 families there were a fulling-mill and a carding-machine. Every farmer's house was provided with one or more wheels, according to the number of women. Every other house had a loom for weaving linen, cotton, and coarse woolen cloths. Manu- factures of this kind amounted on the average in each family to from 100 to 600 yards a year. Considerable quantities of coarse flaxen cloth worth from 15 to 20 cents a yard, thus manufactured in families, were sold to traders in villages or in towns and sent to markets in the southern states.' Similar returns came from other sections of the country. It was reported that in Delaware 150,000 poimds of wool were annually spun and woven in private famiUes. Large exportations of linen from the western counties of Pennsylvania and some from Kentucky and several places in the eastern and middle states were an- nually made. Eighty thousand yards were brought for sale in 1809 to Pittsburgh alone. The number of looms in Pittsburgh increased from 17 in 1807 to 44 in 1810. In the lower counties of Virginia, North Carolina generally, and the upper counties of South Carolina and Georgia almost all the summer clothing, for every description of persons, was of household manufacture; and almost all the slaves were clothed entirely in the same manner. The scarcity of wool prevented an adequate supply from the same source for winter clothing. The number of stores for the sale of foreign goods in Mathews County, Virginia, » Am. State Papers, "Finance," II, 435. A Quarter-Century of Developments 163 decreased from 15 to i between 1802 and 1810. In North Carolina, at a general militia review, out of 1,500 persons present there were less than 40 who were not entirely clothed in homespun.' Generalizing on the basis of the foregoing and similar facts, Gallatin spoke as follows: By far the greater part of goods made of cotton, flax or wool, are manufactured in the private families, mostly for their own use, and partly for sale. They consist principally of coarse cloth, flannel, cotton stuffs, and stripes of every description, hnen and mixtures of wool with flax and cotton. It is probable that about two-thirds of the clothing, including hosiery, and of the house and table linen worn and used by the inhabitants of the United States, who do not reside in cities, is the product of family manufacture.^ The results of the census of manufactures taken in the fall of 1810 revealed the truth of this generalization. These are analyzed in the following chapter. ' Ibid., p. 43S- ' ^Wd., p. 427. CHAPTER V A YEAR'S OUTPUT OF THE FAMILY FACTORY THE RETURNS OF THE MARSHALS IN THE AUTUMN OF 181O In April, 1810, Gallatin, in obedience to a resolution of the House of Representatives, sent to that body a report on American manufactures. The introduction of this report suggested the feasibility of collecting data on every phase of manufacturing through the marshals and assistants when they were taking the third census/ Acting upon this suggestion, Congress, on May i, 1810, altered the act providing for the taking of the census so that it would include statistics on manufacturing establishments and manufactures.^ The bill altering the original act gave the Secretary of the Treasury power to formulate the instructions to the marshals regarding the desired data along these lines. His instructions to them included questions on household manufactures. The reports which came in in the fall of 1810 were sharply criticized on account of their omissions. It was felt that they did not represent anything like a rehable and complete account of all the manufactures carried on in the country. This discussion is not concerned with the returns as a whole, but only with those dealing with goods made in the homes. The character of the informa- tion demanded regarding this phase of the subject was of ' Am. State Papers, "Finance," II, 426. ' U.S. Statutes at Large, II, 605. 164 A Year's Output of the Family Factory 165 such a nature as to lead to many indefinite estimates. At best, the people could make but a gross calculation of the amount and value of what had been made in their homes during the year next preceding the date of the taking of the census. Many admitted that they were unable to give an accurate statement; others were afraid that the object of the government was to tax the industry, hence they either refused to give any account whatever or gave certainly not a full one. The marshal of Rhode Island informed the Secretary of the Treasury that much patience and forbearance were required by his assistants, "from the prejudice of the people, who in many instances refused to give any account of their manufactured articles, and perhaps not any article to the full amount of value from an opinion that the returns were demanded by the govern- ment with a view of taxing the industry." The marshal was of the opinion that from 20 to 25 per cent should be added to the amount returned in order to get the real value of what was made in the homes. It was felt at the time the census was taken that the amounts reported from Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Virginia were close approximations to the real ones. The errors in the remaining states and territories were on the side of omissions.^ On account of the admitted inadequateness of the returns, no full and complete exhibit of household manu- factures in 1810 is possible. Table XI, based on Coxe's digest of the marshals' returns, shows what was done in the famiUes in the way of textile manufactures in all ' Pitkin, Statistics of the U.S. (ed. 1835), p. 470. 1 66 Household Manufactures in the United States H> 5S' H 9 gs is •3 ■* Oi\0 "*00 ► 1/} lo >o n N »o lo U300 "O*© ^0 *0 m ^ r* O 00 ■^ *^ i> H xd" di lo to w M o w vd'oo »o H^o' o to « ■* ^ tO-^r^Ovr-CTioo OiMO « 000 to (ooo vj to m to (O O O M « w ■* H oco t«.ao vo 0"*N coH "*M Ol-*^-H^~ t^ t; 'J O W O 00 "^ O; »O00 ^o WN 00>Oio^w Ovco <* r-o M ^n H o 0"t ^ «\o »o a p^ divo" m" ^\o t^ »o r^ to vo t«.M»orfo « OiM H tooo CO p* ^'O a to*o o »o r~ _ -.__.. .. _ — _. . _ .. Q g^ Q^^ ^ p^^Q «0 Oi« to to O »o Tft^ lo w Tf O ' O O O 00 to tooo . O vj o <0 O M N . to Oi O to t^ tO^O >OtOH M too O OiOoOoO W T^lOtOM O t-"\o r-c< wv>Thr«-« n « ^^w ^oo m to Oi ■* *^ "^ 1 inoo O; « N l>;00 toOjHNtoOtOW-^O t^ d'oo' to o »o pToo di>to"5dit^to^»o ■O^o OitoOiN'O »oO w ^00 t». nf m r- fjMj u ■ OP^C4 0MOOOMC4e400 0»0 M o O O « H H W m" N « lO W ^ M ^M M N pT M M to to o 2! '-' !i Ooo ■* »0 lO to OiOO t^Ot^t^tOtO«0-*M to woo to O O OiO H lo mo o oi ^ p" t^ Oi o»o T^lO'to o ^toNOD to'O n (^ M oo_ « oo H o_ 'i.^'>:0:>«'-i'-i<^ OTfiotoOi^ OW ^wO too CT>-*tO i>-0 toNHOOOitOw N I ■«t 't H Ol HO M Oll»tO^^« M ait) u s s "H r^oo 00 OiTOH Oi»o»oo toto■*^-«ow^ too tJ-00 oiO t^'tiooe* MO oi»ow « O Oi>o O ^ H N O_00 O to O 00 O; t; HO O; W H M H to *noO to M o oi M t^ moo O O to looo m M ^00 ^OOOOO H O HloOlt^HOOOO « o O O O O ^ M r~oo t^ N to H ^O « t^ O tOOO 0>i^0 p- « »o w~o"rC H O O Tf H H H lO ^ HO 00 to to Oi di >nt^ ^r^ to H ■'t »0 t^ OlO H H « to Ol h" to Ok to O 00 0i<0 O^ M Oi O 00 O r- OiOO O N o •^ ^ Q. Q,^ "^ ^^ *^ M ^d" d « dl ■* i^ d d" H O O O C4 o> ^ OtOO oo to to « toOO Oi « HOO M qiC5o_ h"io t^ 00 lO Oi to OO H q;0_ d^o" OH O H to Ov O vi O to OHO O M to 00 00 00 oo 2 rt • a^ : H Tl-00 ■*t>. Oi H 0^00_^ ■* tO*C tOO> oo N to Oi»0 "* to r~ to H oo Tt-H :-H 3 fci s '2^B^a QP Pa-Sspon^od a-fi fsJi Ois tj^ 3 S K o E ** S-4-» -a .-0^ i .d to 2 (^ : a-- s S* « |-° ^1 i.a S - .as»-5g'S E-o'l'&Sg-S I tilled 5 P o ° ftrt'rt Qi oas S*3rta(oraoS (HP S •aSinSm ^111 g A Year's Output of the Family Factory 167 the states and territories. Unfortunately other things evidently made in the family were not reported with such imiformity. All these are included under miscellaneous articles. For general estimates it is probably fair to assume that in textile manufactures omissions were about as common in one part of the country as in another. On account of this possible uniformity one gets a fair cal- culation of the relative amounts of such manufactures in the different parts of the country.' The total value of all textile manufactures in 1810, according to the returns of the marshals, was $41,549,177. Table XI shows that $37,834,629 worth was made in the homes, leaving but $3,714,584 worth made otherwise. The total value of all manufactures (doubtful articles excluded) was, by the same returns, $127,694,602. Coxe estimated, when he made his digest, that the actual value was probably $172,762,676.^ Based on the supposition ' The writer is fully conscious of the fallibility of materials of this type and the consequent danger of basing conclusions on them. However, since the census of manufactures taken in 1810 in connection with the taking of the census of population was the first and only detailed account of household manufactures ever secured by the national government, it is quite evident that no account of such manufactures would be at all complete without a presentation of such statistics even though they are fallible and fragmentary. In reading Table XI and the one exhibiting the same facts by counties, the reader must always keep in mind the circumstances under which the materials were collected. '"Digest of Manufactures," op. oil., 712 f. It has been estimated that in 1810 the factories of America were producing less than 4 per cent of the woolen goods made in the country. When this fact is considered along with another one of equal significance, namely, that the imports of woolen cloth from all sources did not exceed 5,000,000 yards, the importance of the 9,222,166 yards woven in the homes becomes more evident (Clark, Hist, of Manufactures in U.S., p. 253). 1 68 Household Manufactures in the United States that the counties from which there were no returns made a per capita value equal to that of the whole country, the household textile manufactures reached a total value of $39,457,471. The table certainly shows that the homes were doing their part in establishing an independence in common wearing apparel and general household textile supplies. In order to see what the different sections of the various states were doing, it is necessary to analyze the returns from each county. By such an analysis one is able to determine the probable influence of locality, transportation, occupation, and other similar factors on the household production. The accompan3dng elaborate Table XII exhibits the amount and value of homemade textiles in each county and district in the Union as returned by the marshals. Only textile manufactures are included because other articles were not returned with sufl&cient uniformity to justify their inclusion when the county is made the unit. Within each state the counties are grouped according to location on the basis of transportation facilities in so far as they existed at that date. Table XII reveals several interesting facts concerning household manufactures, the most striking one being the extent and uniformity of the system throughout the United States in 1810. The inhabitants in all sections of the country, regardless of locality, economic status, and transportation facilities, were deliberately trying to establish an independence from the outside world, espe- cially in wearing apparel and household textile supplies. The more or less uniformity in the per capita value reveals A Year's Output of the Family Factory 169 TABLE XII The Kinds, Total Yards, Total and Pee Capita Values op Household Textile Manufactures in Every State, Territory, and County in THE United States for the Year Ending in the Autumn of 1810* Yakds op the Following Kinds of Goods Value op All Kinds OF Goods Popu- lation, 1810 States, Territories, AND Counties Cotton Flaxen Woolen Mixed and Un- named Total Capita Value Maine District Cos. on Coast Cumberland Hancock. 811,912 597,096 162,198 66,746 122,389 43,766 201,997 214,816 108,266 49,678 56,872 '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'. 812,796 560,337 151,082 104,460 170,989 42,534 91,272 252,459 122,107 72,859 57,493 1,021,047 736,466 198,733 62,747 134,713 45,000 295.273 284,581 139,281 90,857 54.443 2.645,755 1,893,899 S12.013 233,953 428,091 588,542 751,856 369,654 Hint Dollais 1,067,703 759,156 205,211 105,061 185,227 54.277 209,380 308,547 1SI.391 86,301 70,855 228,709 '65,605 42,835 30.031 42,992 7,870 41.877 63,'04 32,564 17.630 12,910 Dollars 4.67 458 4.56 3.50 4.31 6.90 S.02 489 4.65 4.90 5. 49 Washington York Inland Cos Kennebeck Somerset New Hampshire Cheshire Hillsborough Rockingham Coos S15.985 50,000 221,000 180,000 23,000 20,000 21,985 1,811,309 220,000 512,000 600,757 17,000 153.000 308,552 900,273 248,000 243.000 113,902 24,000 132,000 139.371 1.043,588 300,000 180,770 237.540 40,000 98,000 187.278 4.271.15s 818,000 1.156.770 1.132.199 104,000 403.000 657,186 1,760,417 383,000 568,350 351,391 41,600 169,900 246,176 214,360 40,988 49,149 50,175 28^462 41.595 8.21 11.56 7.00 10.42 597 5-92 Grafton Strafford Vermont 67,614 55,102 12,909 15.857 15.491 10,100 1.366,483 787,122 216,734 23.308 125.763 119.133 302,184 907.568 448,054 130,873 12,576 93,707 60,605 150,293 85,198 52,871 5.440 40,810 6,621 2,426,863 ',343,149 360,516 42,069 276,137 201,850 462,577 1,268,263 69',8o2 201,331 19,881 115.413 217.913 '08,711 18,740 3,087 26,760 34.877 S 82 Cos. on Conn. R. . . Caledonia Essex 6.36 10,74 6.44 4-57 3. S3 7.47 Windhamt WindsorJ Inland Cos Addison Bennington Chittenden Franklin '2,5'!! 1.473 800 3.572 579,361 68;895 129,590 70,492 13.617 34.436 130.373 459,514 118,638 66,834 92.835 S0.991 18,154 22,614 89,448 31,327 8,347 2,222 2,500 i?;i^? ',083,7 '4 260,416 138,751 225,997 123,983 39.144 226',488 576,461 116.053 87,487 21,081 30.236 109,052 '09,202 19.993 IS.893 18,120 16,427 29!486 528 6.71 .404 6.40 Grand Isle. . 6.12 S-lS Rutland 6,667 370 *This table was compiled from "data in Coxe's "Digest of Manufactures." By order of Con- gress, Coxe made an elaborate digest of the census of manufactures taken by the marshals in 1810. Part IV of the digest contained statistics on household manufactures. This part was printed separately in 1S14. The population statistics were copied from Niles' Register, I, 264, 289, 358, 388. _ Carey^ and Lea's American Atlas (1825) was used for the county locations and to check the population statistics in Niles. It was thought best to adopt Coxe's spelling of the coimties in order to facilitate the matter of checking the material in the table. t Nine townships not returned. t Four townships not returned. 170 Household Manufactures in the United States TABLE "Xn— Continued Yards or the Following Kinds of Goods Value or All Kinds or Goods Popu- lation, 1810 Siates,Teriiitories, AND Counties Cotton Flaxen Woolen Mixed and Un- named Total Capita Value Massachusetts*. . . . 4,048,209 1,309,800 41,720 17,775 448^661 4.300 190,593 347,698 2,738,409 527,226 319,905 1,054.558 836,720 4,108,209 1,309,800 41.720 17.775 448'66i 4.300 190,593 347,698 2,798,409 527,226 319,905 1,114.558 836,720 Dollars 2,093.576 12,442 103,813 246,709 2.980 129,397 162,284 1,415,091 181,058 144,452 599.941 489,640 437.659 223,399 22,211 7i:88l 52,789 6,807 31.245 35,169 2x4,260 76,275 64,910 Dollars 4-79 305 0.94 3-78 1.44 4.67 0.44 4.14 4.61 6 60 Coast and Island. . . Barnstable Dukes Essex Middlesex Nantucket Norfolk Plymouth 6o,Q0O Berkshire S.04 389 7.87 7-54 Bristol 60,000 2,362,078 1,121,654 412,006 150,839 292,561 266,248 1,240,424 390,169 431,194 165,479 253,582 1,119.145 452,448 139,572 67,062 131,054 114,760 666,697 188,663 281,184 86,998 109,852 605,675 284,761 10,054 167,188 320,914 7,234 16,700 5,000 291,980 4,086,898 1,858,863 561,632 260.556 488,479 548.196 2,228,035 586.066 729.078 257.477 655,414 2,130,82s 943,015 298,955 149.687 258.336 245.037 1,187,810 329.359 441,304 130,012 287.135 261,942 133,444 40,950 20,723 37,064 34.707 44.733 41.375 13.779 28.611 8.14 8.13. 7.30 7.22 6.97 7.06 9.25 10.67 9-44 10.04 On Long Island Sd . Middlesex Inland Cos Hartford Litchfield Tolland Windham Rhode Island Providence 460,989 63,159 21,500 313,271 11,373 51,686 229,699 35,940 3,200 7,006 33,345 150,208 145.618 50,957 5,000 16,624 56,246 481,841 107,860 352,742 17,741 3,498 2.318.147 257,916 29.700 689.643 79.250 261,638 895.923 101,197 613 ^631 55.052 112,483 76,931 30,769 5,072 9,834 16,294 14.962 11.65 3 29 2.67 Kentt Newport Washington 3.04 7-52 216,013 90A4S 5,394,186 2,622,99s 145,282 24,068 341,530 230,404 34.428 32,26s 32,233 217 212,429 3,257.812 1,717,590 87,272 23,795 254,750 128,655 69.857 22,189 4,301 2,540 95.611 180,659 49,4^3 3,931 3,859 9.048,670 4,480,513 232,554 47.863 616,780 359,059 104.28s 55.322 40,46s 2,757 316,081 5,022,251 2,549,012 130,843 29,846 357.S40 198.975 74.035 31.140 18,023 ^2,304 166,007 959,220 528,871 34,661 8,002 32,390 51.434 9,477 19.536 8,303 96,373 34.347 4.82 3.77 3-73 11. 04 3.87 7.81 1.54 Cos. on Hudson R.X Columbia 20,500 Essex 868 New York (city and Co ) 0.23 4.83 4,182 * Nothing reported from Suffolk County. J The high per capita value in Kent County resulted from 352,742 yards of blended goods by the marshal at $472,921.80. This value was considerably higher than that pkced on similar goods by the marshals in other counties. X Also on Atlantic Ocean and hake Champlain. A Year's Output of the Family Factory TABLE Xll—Cmtinued 171 States, Territories, AND Codnties Yards of the Following Kinds op Goods Cotton Flaxen Woolen Mixed and Un- named Total Value OP All Kinds op Goods Popu- lation, 1810 New York — Con- tinued Queens Rensselaer. , . Richmond . . . Rockland Saratoga .... Schenectady . Suffolk Ulster Washington.. Westchester. . Cos, on Great Lakes Niagara Ontario Seneca Cayuga Genesee Jefferson .... Inland Cos Alleghany . . . Sroom Chenango. . . Cortlandt. . . Delaware .... Franklin. . . . Herkimer Madison .... Montgomery. Oneida Onondaga. . . Otsego St. Lawrence. Schoharie Steuben Sullivan Tioga Lewis 2,263 4,087 7.404 51,141 9,0T2 3,218 2,03s 2,427 1,392 Ii6,4g6 307 3.278 2,826 724 10,000 5,026 80,817 3,009 2,823 4,416 132,936 222,049 23,100 36,792 194,976 S.ooo 158,390 232,042 350,754 224,280 899,068 43,039 329,226 115,585 216,805 88,6go 106,623 1,871,223 11,679 63,455 149.510 39,000 130,801 9.913 190.945 225,297 150,136 12,791 196,106 327,088 36,000 112,128 63,687 35.347 67,340 50,000 51,292 157,862 3, 000 8,008 171,789 3,500 51,220 87,400 384,359 112,190 463,728 17,58s 195.551 49.473 120,346 39,760 51,013 1,076,494 3,162 22,816 64,783 25,400 70,571 5,138 95,590 130,453 85,861 159,633 107,470 153.738 19.047 53.093 35.9 I3.5i . 34.737 25.S00 3.913 7,000 31.780 10,815 5. 620 3.720 1.475 120,361 19.939 3.278 859 80,405 1.926 3.909 1. 057 7. "" 1,000 187,141 382,174 32,100 44,800 366,765 7,500 313,697 348,636 786,354 336,470 1,383.583 63.843 524.777 172.713 340,871 120,877 160,503 3,184,57, I5,l4i 106,210 320,849 67,226 202,096 15,010 396,535 350,775 337,352 333,635 306,585 480,816 56,973 171,953 94,040 49.991 113.080 76,500 Dollars 95,751 222,123 13,863 19.457 323,431 4,063 122,146 173.233 484,312 183,031 749,904 32,554 294.567 89,221 187.905 60.07s 85,582 ',723,33s 7.243 50,738 114,948 37.754 111,029 8,512 158,445 191,490 131.831 198,468 168,638 357,170 30,841 90,776 48,193 25.510 50.337 41,413 19,336 36,309 5.347 7,7S8 33.147 10,201 31,113 26,576 44,389 30,272 125,183 3.971 42,032 16,609 39,843 13,588 IS.140 305,165 1,943 8,130 31,704 8,868 30,303 3,717 22,046 35.144 41.314 33.793 35.987 38,803 7.88s 18.94s 7,246 6,108 7,899 6,433 New Jersey* Bergen Burlington... Cape May. . . Cumberland . Essex Glouchester. . Hunterdon . . Middlesex . . . Monmouth. . Morris Salem Somerset. . . . Sussex 847.469 139.035 374.313 11.739 34.133 68,467 29.S53 43.000 719.395 39,137 33,196 19.483 153.905 108,720 164,240 44,300 169,902 48,477 35.831 301.836 149.094 30,s8o 60,830 13,300 97,561 18,749 14,063 36,000 120,048 78,310 :,94I.I77 I 179.9" 66.319 19.483 98.019 344,836 149,094 321,962 144,551 18,749 339,133 93,400 130,048 345,673 ,268,241 98,759 50,221 9.741 5SHt9l 200,000 198,29s 107,799 126,628 11,705 107,405 57,560 59.819 184,818 345,563 14,728 34,553 3.632 13,670 24.979 19.744 35.984 20,381 22,150 31,823 16,603 13,761 35,549 * All counties run east and west across the state; no classification necessary. 172 Household Manufactures in the United States TABLE Xn— Continued States, Teekitories, AND Counties Yakds or THE Following Kinds oj Goods Cotton Flaxen Woolen Mixed and Un- named Total Value OF All Kinds OF Goods Popd- latioh, 1810 Pennsylvania Cos. on Del. R.* Adams Bedford Berks Bucks Centre Chester Cumberland. . Dauphin. .-. . . Delaware Franklin Huntingdon. . Lancaster .... Luzerne Lycoming. . . . Mifflin Montgomery.. Northampton. Northumberland Philadelphia. Wayne York Cos.N.W.^.... Alleghany . . . Armstrong... Beaver Butler Cambria .... Clearfield. . . . Crawford Erie Fayette Greene Indiana Jefferson. ... M'Kean Mercer Somerset .... Venango. ... Warren Washington . . Westmorland . Tioga and Potter 611,481 S44,os>9 12,429 12,745 20,022 7,SS2 10,648 7,441 24,504 22,776 9.793 X 2,001 23,336 3,154 19,973 13,563 73,S66 233,232 1,130 36,234 17,362 15,948 850 1,306 3,250 1.037 S.ooo 1,000 54 6,0x6 S78 14,552 429 1,990,622 ',024^17 75,2X2 78,422 238,0x6 1x3,293 X7,67S 170,604 255,385 8x,66o 83,121 70,029 106,482 80,703 70,172 75,429 X97,90X 77.788 16,312 216,213 966,40s 61,725 120,563 82,501 X 2,900 4,300 53,330 20,217 183,392 39.181 50,000 1,3x8 28,3x2 21,1X9 6,549 270,803 10,070 990,346 743,341 18,639 31,422 71,812 30,211 28,767 74,996 48,786 77.451 36.731 25.030 32,744 28,232 20,108 30,927 38,800 71.437 16.168 7.90s 60,180 247,00$ 5,531 28,274 13,030 930 16,819 7,979 67,897 5.II2 XO.OOO 200 52 5.499 2,860 160 81,159 1. 503 1,801,025 S3o,igs XX, 207 6,321 8x4 x,994 245,304 79,250 7.571 4,600 7x,2X4 56,411 752 5,471 40,000 113.175 157.784 28,327 970^30 230,756 22,070 3.461 15 33.796 5,062 1,000 10,910 136,545 7.346 1,811 515,129 2,929 6,400,479 4,14^,857 1x7.487 128.9x0 329,850 151,056 57,904 253,041 330,669 427.19X 79,250 137,216 111,660 233,776 168,500 111,005 125,390 78,800 113,175 342,704 484,972 25,347 340,954 2,251,632 230,756 89,326 166,199 111,479 l4,68p 9.067 73.399 29,248 285,08s S4,3SS 62,000 i,Si8 231 50,737 136.545 31.32s 9,098 515,129 369,443 12,002 Dollars 4,250,773 3,043,156 70,831 77.947 280,790 378.51s 30.742 163,274 171,078 265,410 79.250 77.774 66,684 152,381 87,97s 7S.200 77.397 94,200 56,587 159.S10 399.979 16,613 252,019 1,207,617 115,379 46,781 83,493 60,659 7,750 4.725 37,706 19,032 164,453 28,273 31.S00 8rl 129 35,563 68,273 I9.74S 5.690 270,342 200,829 6,484 813,091 614,569 15,152 IS.746 43.146 32,371 io,68x 39.596 26,757 3X.883 14.734 23,083 14.778 53,927 18,109 11,006 12,132 29.703 38.14s 36,327 111,210 4,125 31,958 198,522 2S,3I7 6,143 I2,x68 7,346 2,XX7 87s 6,X78 3,758 24,7x4 12,544 6.2x4 161 „'*^ 8,277 11,284 3.060 3.827 36.289 26,392 1,716 Delaware^ .... Kent New Castle. Sussex 661 661 280,369 38,427 75,440 166,502 63,943 4,269 11,524 48,150 17,820 17,820 362,793 42,696 I0S,445 214,652 207,822 23,482 52,939 131,401 72.674 20,49S 24.429 27.750 * Also in lower Susquehanna valley and southeast of the Alleghany Mountains, t Northwest of the Alleghany Mountains. X AH counties on the Bay. A Year's Output of the Family Factory TABLE XII— Continued 173 Yards op the Following Kinds op Goods Value op All Kinds OP Goods Popu- lation, 1810 Per Capita Value States, Tebkitories, AND Counties Cotton Flaxen Woolen Mized and Un- named Total Marylaivd* 1,755.963 1,284,853 30,155 182,517 50,490 75,531 203,810 43,719 102,387 39,244 82,951 55,000 90,000 80,000 177,920 71,129 1,755,963 1,284,833 30,155 182,517 50,490 75,531 203,810 43,719 102,387 39,244 82,951 S5,ooo 90,000 80,000 177,920 71,129 Dollars 1,013,320 664,096 14,689 78,297 23,56s 67,076 81,524 23,347 65,528 20,240 41,475 27.500 45.000 50,000 88,960 36,89s 372,541 75,810 9,453 13,066 20,245 18,108 21,258 1I.4SO 20,589 16,648 12,794 17,195 16,971 14,230 Dollars 2.71 Anne Arundel. . . 0.55 1.03 2.49 5.13 Baltimore Cecil Charles Dorchester 1.77 Harford Kent Prince George. . . 1. 6s Worcester 5.34 Talbot 2-59 471,110 56.702 209,944 71,647 132,817 471,110 56,702 209,944 71.647 132.817 349,224 23,109 152,583 40,715 132,817 78,056 6,909 34,437 17,980 18,730 3-34 Frederick 2:^6 Virginia! 2.998,255 1,662,084 53,978 4,918,273 1,248,262 82,000 408,224 ?9,0W 11.087 1,298,793 349,193 82,000 31,257 26,709 9,623,54s ^■t;ot 164,000 186,922 150,992 33.766 93,764 115,376 29,500 87,692 187,696 147,52s 67,000 101,875 42,795 56,034 118,900 98,000 4.643.929 ',456,033 32,533 56,958 98,413 50,331 13,889 31.22s 57.688 17,700 45.840 93.848 64,344 33,500 50,937 21,397 18,678 59.4SO 32,667 909,670 341,358 9,376 15,743 15,411 17,544 5.186 9.979 '3:^8 13,111 10,427 15,082 9.945 g.i86 4,094 10,988 9,285 5,592 4,227 4,414 5.14 Cos.inTideW 4.J2 iM Brunswick .... 155.665 124,283 6.30 2.80 Charles City 33.766 93.764 11S.376 3.68 Dinwiddle.... Elizabeth City.. Fairfax . 29,500 4.91 87,692 3.50 187,696 113,462 Hanover 34,063 67,000 4.27 3-37 Isle of Wight.... 101,875 34,236 40,746 98,400 84,000 Tames City King George King and Queen King William . . . 20,500 14,000 3.89 S.41 75,560 35.897 SI,I2S 2 83 51,135 17.0A^ 3.86 1 * Nothing reported from Calvert County, t On Potomac River below the Fall Line. X On Potomac River above the Fall Line. § Nothing reported from Greenville. Amherst, Fluvana, Pendleton, Mason, Hampshire, and Prince William coimties. 1 1 In the tidewater region. 174 Household Manufactures in the United States TABLE XII— Continued States, Tekkitosies, AND Counties Yaeds 07 THE Following Kinds op Goods Cotton Flaxen Woolen Mixed and Un- named Total Valde of All Kinds OF Goods Popu- lation, 1810 Virginia — ConUnued Nansimond New Kent Northampton . . . Northumberland Prince George. Princess Anne. Richmond .... Southampton. . Spotsylvania.. Stafford Surty Sussex Warwick Westmorland. . York Norfolk Prom Fall Line*. Albemarle. ... Amelia Bedford Buckingham. . Campbell Charlotte Culpeper Cumberland. . Fauquier Franklin Goochland Halifax Henry Loudoun Louisa Lunenburg ... Madison Mecklenburg.. Nelson Nottaway .... Orange Patrick Pittsylvania . . Powhatan .... Prince Edward Between Mis.] . . . Augusta Bath Berkley Botetourt. . . . Frederick S1.792 68,618 86,7go 122,382 11,866 70,005 36,29s 69,927 315,140 22,383 7,860 73,220 II7,S7S 97,422 948 ll,S66 6,000 7,r(S2,770 176,769 1,790 56,525 25,020 30,000 21,097 60,240 106,000 51,180 53.629 57,28s 87,718 140,068 1,984,818 32,794 151.418 21,830 14,401 77,823 15,900 37.6S9 112,344 39,277 28,687 409 242,493 70,936 l67,6s5 150,113 S.578 469,924 32,830 32,401 33.360 32,860 78,337 1,931 375 15 49.217 47.650 24,466 9,656 90,70s 37.024 Ii8,6s7 38,81s 234,908 21,810 40,440 61,576 9,046 179,606 14,994 97,896 160,583 30,152 326,850 47,490 13,953 45.108 I,034<913 221,640 23,000 10,300 46,884 47,463 '31,963 53,655 65,127 314,959 8,247 6,200 3,322 18,307 21,623 17,710 48,414 24,591 70,005 76,715 68,618 86,7go 122,382 70,544 72,787 315,140 130,000 97,422 85,734 138,672 1,790 56,525 25,020 6,000 3,767,625 215,141 151,418 148,260 152,802 77,823 15,900 200,036 112,344 144,054 133,997 112,608 242,493 70,936 167,65; 180,50! 118,657 101,830 234,908 40,512 98,705 116,910 526,850 179,606 68,649 163,023 1,642,418 221,640 52,870 34,210 112,573 135,469 Dollars 23,334 38,350 22,872 28,930 40,794 30,377 49,297 105,047 68,400 49,028 42,867 69,336 7,347 23,740 12,519 2,400 2fi33,290 93,564 75,709 74,160 79,052 38,936 79,500 117,314 56,172 48,822 70,592 62,359 80,831 35,468 112,915 187,095 50,328 34,507 "7,454 34,892 48,543 56,714 263,42s 89,803 41,624 81,511 73S. 73,880 32,169 21,739 57,358 52,784 10,324 6,478 7,474 8,308 8,050 9,498 6,214 13,497 13,296 9,830 6,855 11,362 1,835 8,102 5,187 22,872 335,519 18,268 10,594 16,148 20,059 11,001 13,161 18,967 9,992 22,689 10,724 10,203 22,131 5,611 21,338 11,900 12,265 8,381 18,453 9,684 9,278 12,323 4,695 17,172 8,073 12,409 154,434 14,308 4,837 11,479 13,301 22,574 * From the Fall Line to the Blue Ridge Mountains, t Between the Blue Ridge and Alleghany Mountains. A Year's Output of the Family Factory TABLE XII— Continued 175 Yards op the Following Kinds of Goods Value OF All Kinds OF Goods POPD- lation, 1810 States, Territories, AND Counties Cotton Flaxen Woolen Mixed and Un- named Total Capita Value Virginia — Continued Grayson 90,665 45,777 90,665 45,777 90,736 106,357 58,858 301,210 145,960 168,330 77,763 874,864 39,185 17,715 46,239 47,710 106,183 51,154 57,024 184,704 74,9" 79,270 23,215 79,904 37,874 29,766 Dollars 18,850 35,768 41,452 30,492 11,138 70,813 104,490 30,370 416,194 'nil 23,835 25,438 44,270 17,051 27,553 91.198 24,796 43,039 10,720 50,122 23,178 14.510 4.941 5,525 11,851 8,409 10,318 12,753 13,646 12,136 8.356 78,359 2,717 5,843 3.745 5,914 4,694 12,793 5,444 8,175 2,854 6,316 3,007 3.036 Dollars 11.56 3.41 3.02 4.93 2.96 0.87 519 8.6i 3.63 5-31 7.21 o.lS 6.36 430 4.44 4.41 5.87 7.13 tM 3.76 4'78 Hardy 13,255 14,352 10,557 25,764 77,481 26,471 84,507 65,534 34,801 157,046 145,960 96,946 48,897 650,280 39,185 17,715 26,642 21,870 80,412 51,154 57,024 92,352 48,440 75,960 18,481 53,395 37,874 29,776 Rockbridge Rockingham 13,500 33,893 Washington Wythe 11% I2,8z8 21,281 10,678 47,049 14,162 ' 164^17 WestofMts* Brooke Cabell Giles 2,279 7,160 591 13,653 989 16,727 5,027 24,782 Greenbrier Kenhawa Lee 23,088 3,310 69,264 26,471 22,446 Monroe Ohio Russell. 3,379 Tazewell Wood North CarounaI . . 7,376,154 3,389,624 76,500 113,000 66,000 28,700 103,000 80,000 43,500 133.000 17S.OOO 41,000 126,500 150,000 68,000 81 ,000 215,000 80,727 158,000 100,248 5 7, 600 74,400 155,000 7,376,154 3,389,624 76.SOO 113,000 66,000 28,700 ro3,ooo 80,000 43,500 133,000 175,000 41 ,000 126,500 150,000 68,000 81,000 215,000 89,727 158,000 100,248 S7,6oo 74,400 155,000 2,989,140 1,474,550 38,200 45 ,000 29,000 14,300 58,000 15,000 12,000 66,000 70,000 1 1 ,000 42,000 60,000 33,000 40,000 86,000 44.823 45,000 40,000 28,000 14,500 66,500 552,213 244,360 7,203 11, 218 5,671 4,778 5,347 4,823 3,022 12,676 9,382 ^tl 12,423 5,965 4,867 15,620 6,052 6,029 5,572 5,987 5. S3 5-87 5. 30 4.01 511 2.99 10.87 3. II 3.97 5. 21 7.46 1.57 Lovf-countryt Beaufort Bertie Bladen Brunswick. . . . Camden Carteret Craven Currituck Duplin ^% Gates 5°s Greene Halifax Hertford 7.41 7.46 Hyde bhnson ^ 82 Martm * West of the Alleghany Mountains. t Nothing reported from Chowan County. X In the low-country, extending from about sixty to eighty miles inland. 176 Household Manufactures in the United States TABLE ^11— Continued States, Territories^ AND Counties Yards or the Following Kinds of Goods Cotton Flaxen Woolen Mixed and Un- named Total Value OF All Kinds OF Goods Popu- lation, 18x0 North Carolina— Continued Nash New Hanover., Northamplton. . Onslow Pasquotank Perquimans Pitt Robeson Sampson Tjrrel Washington. , . Wayne , Back-country Anson Ash Buncombe Burke Cabarras Caswell Chatham..^. . . Franklin...'... Greenville Guilford Haywood Iredell Lincoln Mecklenburg. . Montgomery . . Moore Orange Person Randolph .... Richmond Rockingham. . Rowan Rutherford ... Stokes Surry Wake Warren Wilkes 112,500 46,000 200,400 72,000 168,600 66,000 145,000 66,200 127,500 58,524 57,725 134,000 3,986,530 iiz,ooo 221,000 95 1800 77,000 39,550 131,000 199,000 174,000 261,780 148,400 17,000 132,600 223,300 191,600 96,000 100,500 279,000 79,000 86,600 141 ,000 85,000 235,000 140,000 68,000 142,000 276,400 151,000 84,000 112,500 46,000 200,400 72,000 168,600 66,000 145,000 66,200 127,500 58,524 57,725 134,000 3^986,530 izi,ooo 221,000 95 ,800 77,000 39,550 131,000 199,000 174,000 261,780 148,400 17,000 132,600 223,300 191,600 96,000 100,500 279,000 79,000 86,600 141,000 85,000 235.000 140,000 68, 000 142,000 276,400 151,000 84,000 Dollars 38,500 23,000 100,000 28,300 137,000 32,000 62,000 46,900 47,000 14,000 28,827 18,700 1,514,590 44,400 103,000 10,100 45,000 13,000 5S.200 84,000 55 .000 120,000 67.300 S.540 52,000 53,700 76,500 39,000 39.5SO 111,600 15,000 34,fioo 40,300 16,500 104,000 79,000 28,000 71,000 55,300 65,000 22,000 7,268 11,465 13,082 6,669 7,674 6,052 9,169 7,528 6,620 3,364 3,464 8,687 307,853 8,831 3,695 9,277 11,007 6,158 ix,757 12,977 10,166 15,576 11,420 2,789 10,972 i6,3S9 14,272 8,430 6,367 20,13s 6,642 10,112 6,69s 10,316 21,543 13,202 11,645 ^ 0,366 17,086 11,004 9.054 A Year's Output of the Family Factory 177 TABLE XII— Continued Yards of the Following Kinds or Goods Value or All Kinds OP Goods Popu- lation, 1810 Per Capita Value States, Teeeitories, AND Counties Cotton Flaxen Woolen Mixed and Un- named Total SoDTH Carolina*. . . Low-country^ Barnwell 3.083.188 798,568 74.879 SS.471 71.89s 125.091 42.560 73,718 55.950 43.423 20,061 45,986 166,135 23,399 2^84,620 176,875 150,320 378,251 70,502 65,915 169,236 38,780 154,420 427,440 98,721 205,800 348,360 690 72,636 S6fiso 110,627 78,669 6,000 3,267,141 933,287 80,879 55,471 83,200 165.522 42,560 73,718 112,000 50,423 20,061 45,986 175,03s 28,432 1,333,854 176,875 175,790 384,739 70,502 83.191 169,236 37.870 154,420 427,440 98,721 205,800 348,360 Dollars 1,677,228 499,613 41.700 27.736 43.974 91.252 21,280 36,859 72,815 26,312 10,031 15,273 93.244 192,732 35.251 fjll 19.390 77.210 213.720 49.361 102,900 174,180 296,76s I29fi25 12,280 25.887 5.564 9.047 4.966 13.229 9.027 19.054 6,871 167,740 21,156 11.479 23.160 11.857 6,318 14.982 6,641 13,964 14.259 10.995 10,032 22,897 Dollars 5.36 3.87 3.40 Beaufort Chesterfield 11,30s 40,431 7.90 Darlington Horry 4.89 56,050 7,000 8 20 Marlborough .... s 10 nrflnrphiiTgh 0.76 Richland 8,900 5,033 3', 958 Williamsburg. . . 2.22 Back-country Abbeville 6qo 16,586 7-03 Chester 25,470 6,488 8:12 Edgefield 8.32 Fairfield 2 97 Lancaster 690 i6,s86 7 32 5.6s Lexington 2.92 Newberry 5.53 Spartanburgh... York Pendleton 7.61 3,688,534 1,4^4^3 4.510 266,000 86,350 7,650 165,977 12,904 4,250 34,69s 58,960 7,800 3,000 11,253 1,790 S,59i 4,2^0 483.925 213,793 4,189.303 1,704,625 4.S10 400,000 91.60S J>^SO 186,208 16,005 4.250 38,550 60,180 10,800 3,000 2,143.348 870,950 2.255 216,750 47,116 4,038 103,140 6,851 2,125 19.275 30.912 5,662 1,500 248,492 103,066 2,827 2,30s 10,858 13.540 11.242 2,586 3.417 6,111 2,210 6,228 3,739 8.62 L(m-country% 8.4S 0.80 Bullock 134,000 5.25s 200 18,421 3,101 Chatham 0.29 Columbia Effingham 1,790 20 9.02 2.6s 3.855 846 3,000 3. IS Laurens 374 13-99 0.40 * Nothing reported from Colleton, Charleston, Greenville, and Georgetown. Something must have been done in Colleton and Greenville, as there were 183 looms reported from the former and 500 from the latter. t In the low-country, extending from about eighty to one hundred miles inland. % Nothing reported from Camden County. § In the low-country, including pine barrens and the country of sand hills, sixty to ninety miles inland. 178 Household Manufactures in the United States TABLE XII— Continued Yards of the Following Kinds of Goods Value OF All Kinds OF Goods Popu- lation, 1810 Pee Capita Value States, Territories, AND Counties Cotton Flaxen Woolen Mixed and Un- named Total Montgomery Pulaski gg.ooo 408,82s Will 35.196 6.077 64,000 127.334 8.425 2,203,721 S1.813 155.900 200,990 167,687 120,13s 197,182 182,594 100,000 65,452 123.389 178,770 162,250 143.750 43.775 6,499 189,415 114,120 99,000 408,82s 31.978 57.304 35,196 6.077 82.062 152,800 8,425 2,434,678 77.719 171,211 215,225 174.673 170.635 226,759 190,677 130,000 65,452 136,917 201,614 182,498 158,114 43.775 11,127 214,162 114,120 Dollars 49,500 204,413 15,989 28,652 17,598 4,SS8 49,103 57,300 4.213 1,272,398 51,812 85,606 114,730 89,083 85.318 116,904 97.359 70,625 32.726 75,223 106,518 7,134 104,255 57.060 2,954 4.477 2,206 744 8,72s 9,940 676 145,42s 6,356 7,628 12,156 10.815 11.679 13.330 10,569 8.597 4.555 8,369 12,297 lo,02g 7,573 3,405 1,026 14,887 2,154 Dollars 16.76 2.<;8 5.422 Telfair 6.H Warren Washington Wayne 3.835 14,227 25,466 5. 63 6.2? Back-country 9.4*^ ',362 270,132 25,906 15,3" 14,235 5. 783 50,500 21,317 8,083 30,000 875 8. IS Clarke 11.22 Elbert Franklin 1,203 8.I3 7.30 Hancock Jackson 8,260 8.77 1:22 7.18 Morgan Oglethorpe 630 12,898 22,844 20,248 14.364 8.Q1 8.65 Randolph Walton . . 732 3,896 24.747 6.96 Wilkes 4.685,205 1,402,568 35,510 48,022 46,183 5.000 40,060 102,141 36,620 17,890 20,065 66,473 86,168 28,838 48,980 27.178 114,290 15.509 47.113 139.871 4,685,205 1,402,568 35,510 48.022 46.183 5,000 40,060 102,141 36,620 17,890 20,065 66,473 86,168 28,838 48,980 27.178 114,290 15,509 47,113 139,871 2,057,081 648,561 14.204 24,011 18,473 2,500 15.813 45.359 18,310 8,850 10,032 31,076 43,084 14,419 18,367 13.589 47.731 6,203 23,556 75.813 406,511 13^,434 3,706 3,430 4,311 4,268 3.473 8.947 3.307 2,301 2.369 7.531 7,752 4,703 6,777 2,964 13.399 2,357 3.674 12,459 On or* 4.61 3.83 Bullet Cardwellt ■ • 0-59 Gallatin" S-54 3.84 4.14 5.56 3.28 2.70 4.58 2.63 6.41 6.08 * On or about fifty miles from the Ohio River, t Output of I establishment included. A Year's Output of the Family Factory TABLE Xa— Continued 179 Yards of the Following Kinds of Goods Value OF All Kinds OF Goods Popu- lation, 1810 Per Capita Value States , Territories , AND Counties Cotton Flaxen Woolen Mixed and Un- named Total Kentucky — Con- tinued 190,880 58,898 38,866 33.641 154,372 3,282,637 92,790 128,490 30,993 267,212 23.155 63.70s 115.401 121.434 11,320 68,605 25.536 207,687 33,020 82,699 lo6,8s7 69,611 93,303 51,884 163,786 218,213 236.569 163.653 196.630 43.197 56,411 19,950 133.669 127,104 135,473 60,654 133.626 190,880 58,898 38,866 33,641 154,372 3,282,637 92,790 128,490 30,993 267,212 23,155 63,705 115.401 121,434 11,320 68,60s 25,536 207,687 33,020 82,699 106,857 69,611 93,303 51,884 163,786 218,213 236,569 163,653 196,630 43,197 56,411 19,950 133,669 127,104 60^654 133,626 Dollars ?r,^2 20,600 15,521 61,748 1,408,520 37,767 64,222 16,174 106,884 11,565 46,160 'I'm 32,584 10,640 83,074 16,510 33,079 45,581 34.80s 37.321 25,947 81,893 104,106 97.333 65.461 78.652 21.275 26,651 9,245 49,457 63.469 47.90s 24,261 53,450 14,078 4,898 3,792 3,061 14,877 268,077 6,011 11,286 3,608 18,009 2,181 3,285 11,020 11,519 2,398 6,191 2,082 21,370 3,485 8,013 9.186 6.735 8.377 8,676 12,123 15,540 12,630 12.975 4,181 6,897 1,731 12,419 11,937 13.248 5.430 9.659 Dollars 6.78 4.87 Ohio 5.43 Shelby 4.15 All other Cos i.2S 6.28 S.69 4.48 5.93 Butler Clarke 3,9s Clay 2.36 Estill Fayettet 3.88 Floyd 4.70 5-17 4.46 8.59 6.26 5. 18 6.06 Pulaski 3.86 Rockcastle 5-34 Scott* 3-98 5-32 3.61 Wayne Woodford 1,790,514 161^488 70,078 24.56s 34.141 738 228,193 124,179 34,683 2,052.848 955,284 196,909 70,078 24.565 1,675.314 491,364 107,310 35,039 12,283 261,727 85,728 15.608 4,516 1,5" 6.40 Cos. on Uiss.t Davidson Dickson§ Humphreys 776 8.13 * Output of 2 establishments included. t Output of 6 establishments included. $ On the Mississippi, lower Cumberland, and Tennessee rivers. Most of western Tennessee included. § The output of one establishment included. Same true of Bedford, Sumner, and Rutherford counties. i8o Household Manufactures in the United States TABLE XII— Continued Yaeds op the Following Kinds op Goods Valde OP All Kinds OP Goods Popu- lation, iSio Per Capita Value States, Tebbitories, AND Counties Cotton Flaxen Woolen Mixed and Un- named Total Tennessee — Cm- timui 1 25 .540 63.012 40,660 172,701 65,084 59.927 971,663 20,000 7.998 145.540 73.690 172,701 130,168 59.927 1,097,364 Dollars 77,770 39.421 17.396 24.305 86,351 61.525 29,964 1,183,950 29,126 38,290 25,366 68,695 17,261 8,142 16,876 21,031 39.447 43.717 41.455 58.522 SI.542 19.913 46i496 77.380 34.198 97.422 17.014 36,212 123,968 38,076 94,472 33.956 31,253 37.044 19.513 8,021 7,270 4,262 13.792 13.153 11,952 5.643 175,999 3.959 8.242 Dollars Robertson Stewart 2,68o S.42 4.08 Sunuier 1,700 4.550 1.77 6.57 SIS S.31 6.71 7.36 Wilson 8,136 56.948 Overton All other Cos.: Anderson* 20,8S7 104,014 Bedford 76.580 76,580 4.64 Bledsoe*t Blount* 12.098 2,668 4,190 4.798 5.154 5.730 4.546 6.397 9.713 7,643 2,583 5.401 7.309 10,171 6.104 10,359 2.SO4 S.581 10.265 4,595 11.649 6.847 5.725 7.740 4.028 5.68 Campbell* 6 47 Carter* Claiborne* Cocke* 4.08 Franklin GUes 36,253 50,404 764 27.735 26,646 64,752 77.050 6.88 Granger* 6.48 Greene* 6.03 Hickman Jackson 35.170 SS.12S 345 S.820 41.335 SS.125 7-71 6 ^6 Knox* 7 60 Lincoln 61.350 193.328 460 1,303 5,587 212 67.397 194,843 5. 60 9.40 Rhea* Roane* 6.49 Rutherford ... . 247.936 247,936 12 08 Sevier* Smith 123,981 15,545 31,489 171.01S 8.11 Sullivan* Warren 62,505 62,505 White 30,031 2,470 6,525 39.026 4.84 Ohio J. 56,072 43,444 1,093,031 748,941 74.577 28,550 112,351 85,060 93,074 60,369 1,881 2,281 11.072 2,322 701.156 471,083 3,218 200 481 25.736 66,968 1,943.333 1,313,038 74.658 34.049 123,623 87,863 25,736 66,968 1.032.235 695,149 31.711 17.285 67.367 36.586 14.154 26,787 216,164 163493 9,434 2,791 11,150 11,097 2.674 10.878 4-77 Cos. on or% Adams Athens 6.ig Butler Belmont Clinton i.s2 * Value only reported. t Population of Bledsoe not reported separately. X Nothing reported from Clermont and Gallia counties. § On or within about fifty miles of the Ohio River. A Year's Output of the Family Factory TABLE XII— Continued i8i Yakds of the Following Kinds or Goods Value OF All Kinds OF Goods Popd- LATION, 1810 States, Teeeitortrs, AND Counties Cotton Flaxen Woolen Mixed and Un- named Total Capita Value Ohio — Continued Franklin Fayette Guernsey Hamilton Highland Jefferson 8,058 2,282 18,888 9,000 25 27,871 i6,99S 19,652 22!68c 57,714 2,496 176 11,856 5,000 5,170 19,855 5,133 1,207 23,910 44,785 inn 10,024 47,060 7,218 15,698 38,095 55,300 11,766 229,073 104,416 6,432 15,935 58,280 22,394 23,141 143,747 36,680 107,694 55,744 39,685 10,024 155,680 18,928 16,282 17,224 94,650 62,735 47,453 618,295 143,132 10,632 15,935 80,250 51,239 81,919 8,336 38,413 16,841 41,807 29,699 100,092 Dollars 32,401 12,589 10,174 85,519 25,590 58,656 27,872 21,826 10,024 82,050 11,661 8^800 43,153 35,08s 27,426 337,086 68,927 7,07s 7,967 32,100 46,649 43,603 4,929 21,591 10,061 24,398 15,819 53,967 3,486 1,854 3,051 15,258 5,766 17,260 7,722 10,036 3,304 15,514 3,399 2,734 3,045 9,925 5.991 7,124 52,1571 6,303 1,459 2,000 11,361 2,917 5,870 2,149 3,852 1,603 3,491 Dollars 10.92 6.78 3-33 5-74 4.44 3.40 3.61 2.17 303 S.29 3-24 3.08 2.89 til 3.8s 6.40 10.94 4.8s 398 2 82 Muskingum Preble Ross 2,805 104,006 10,923 1,809 787 584 2,273 2,509 7,435 2,918 32,50J 1,148 1,200 Scioto Stark Tuskarawas Warren 1,860 13,091 54,046 Pickaway All other Cos 436 12,628 32,333 344,089 37,568 3,000 Delaware Fairfield 80,250 20,199 57,824 29,678 10,275 24,262 Geauga 374 803 1,215 359 3,044 6,833 11,021 3,07s 445 3,522 S07 19,64s 20,217 1,838 7,931 10,205 29,699 12,755 15 99 7.43 2.29 5. 61 6.28 Knox Licking Madison Miami Portage Trumbull 7S,7So 11,587 6 22 26,000 20,000 20,000 46,000 20,000 26,000 39,500 20,000 19,500 24,023 15,471 8,552 1.64 Washington Alexandria. ... 26,000 2 28 Mississippi Ter Adams 342,472 58,794 51,216 28,375 16,650 33,747 42,80s 11,950 8,060 450 7,898 6,818 350,820 65,612 51,216 29,105 16,650 33,747 42,805 ":olo 7dfs 45 ,660 266,493 52,936 38,412 22,167 12,488 25,310 32,103 8,963 6,045 21,998 12,513 33,558 40,352 10,002 4,750 3,102 2,016 4,001 4,699 1,427 1,114 2,920 1,253 5,068 6.63 Amite 8.07 7.37 6.14 Claiborne 150 580 Jefferson 6.8s Baldwin 6.28 Warren 5 43 Washington .... Wayne Wilkinson 44,860 300 500 6.53 i82 Household Manufactures in the United States TABLE Xn— Continued Yards of the Following Kinds of Goods Valde OF All Kinds OF Goods POPD- LATION, 1810 States, Territories, AND Counties Cotton Flaxen Woolen Mixed and Un- named Total Capita Value Orleans Ter* 133,180 15,000 13,188 14,907 1,625 2,305 2,500 22,311 28,125 20,250 12,969 133,180 13.188 14,907 1,62s 2,305 2,500 22,311 28,125 20,250 12,969 Dollars 106,941 12,000 10,550 H.926 1.300 1,844 2,000 18,249 22,500 16,200 10,372 43,154 2,895 4,142 4,467 2,870 1.077 4,539 4,573 5.048 7,369 6,174 DoUars 2.48 4.15 2. 55 2.67 0.45 1. 71 0.44 3.99 4.46 Concordia IberviUe LaFourche Natchitoches.... Ouachita Point Coupe. . . . Rapide Opelousas Attakapas I 68 Tl.l.Timie Tup 90,039 36^596 90,039 S4.023 32,066 21.957 12,282 7.275 5,007 4.39 4.41 438 St. Clair Indiana Ter First Division... Second Division. 54,977 11,699 17,600 92,740 4,066 52,445 19.378 19.378 77,171 1,550 20,103 13,775 41.400 343 244,266 17.315 89,423 20,103 60,557 41,400 15.468 166,813 11,670 71,690 IS.077 28,944 31.671 7.761 24,520 Popula- tion returned by counties 6.80 Fourth Division. Fifth Division... 19,66s 27,117 Sixth Division, . 6,013 9,112 Michigan TER.t 1,216 421 795 2.405 1,300 i.oiS 90 3,621 1,721 1,810 90 3.470 1,616 1,764 90 4.147 2,227 ^l8*o 0.83 0.73 1.31 Detroit district. . Erie district Huron district . . *The outer districts of Louisiana reported 1,777 spinning-wheels and 601 looms, but no cloth There were no data for Orleans and the German Coast districts, t Nothing reported from Michilimackinac district. the fact that, relatively speaking, one county was doing about what every other county was. When one takes into consideration the simple life that many of the people lived at that time, it seems safe to conclude that many families must have supplied all their needs of goods exhibited in the table. Another important fact revealed by the table is the influence of location with regard to transportation faciUties on the output of the family factory. Except in the Maine A Year's Output of the Family Factory 183 district and in Vermont, where the output was rather uniform in all counties, this factor seems to have had the effect of increasing the amount. For example, the back- country counties in Massachusetts made a per capita value of $6.60, while the coast and island counties made but $3.05; the inland communities of Connecticut made $9.25 per capita and those on Long Island Sound but $8 . 14. In New York the inland and frontier counties made $5.64 and $5.99, while the river and coast coimties made but $4.82. Similar conditions existed in Penn- sylvania, the inland counties making $6 . 08 and the river and older ones but $4.71. Passing south of the Mason and Dixon Hne, one finds the counties above the Fall Line in Maryland making $4.47 per capita and those below but $2.22; in Virginia in the corresponding regions, $6 . 04 and $4.26; the people in the Valley and west of the mountains making $4.13 and $5.31. The back-country in South CaroHna made a per capita value of $7.03 and the low-country $3.87. In Georgia the values were about equal, $8.75 and $8.45; while in North Carolina they were reversed, low-country $5.87, back $4.92.' In all three of the states west of the mountains the per capita value was higher in the counties some distance from the rivers. Since the territories were still in such frontier conditions, no attempt was made to classify the coimties. Those in Mississippi and Indiana made about the same per capita values as inland counties everywhere. ' This reverse was probably due to the fact that there were few counties in the low-country where the slave outnumbered the free population. Table XIII shows that the slaves had no influence on the output of the family factory in this state. 184 Household Manufactures in the United States Two other facts revealed by the table are: (i) counties in which the larger towns were situated had a relatively small per capita value, showing that the family system was peculiar to the rural communities; (2) in general, the material was raised in the county producing the goods, woolen goods predominating in the districts where sheep- raising was common and cotton cloth where cotton was grown. Since flax could be grown in all sections of the country, linen cloth was more generally produced than any other kind. It seems a little surprising that the homes in New. Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, and Maine were making so much cotton cloth at this date, those in Maine fabricating more than those in Pennsylvania, and those in each of the states of Rhode Island and New Hampshire more than those in New York. This means that the South was supplying New England with cotton for some time before the coming of the factory system into this section. The table does not show the probable influence of one important factor ia the southern states, viz., slave popula- tion. In order to determine the effects of this factor on the output of the plantation factory and the probable amount done by slave labor, three groups of counties were selected from the chief slave-holding states as follows: (i) counties with a slave population of less than 26 per cent of the total; (2) counties in which the slave and free population was about equal; and (3) counties in which the slaves largely predominated. The facts exhibited by such a selection are revealed in Table XIII. This table reveals the following facts as to the relation which existed between slave population and household A Year's Output of the Family Factory 185 TABLE XIII Slave Population and Household Textile Manufactures in i8io CODNTVAND STATE PopuiATioN or Coun- ties IN 1810 Slave Free Total Percentage of Total Pop- ulation Slave Free Value op Manu- factubes Total Per Capita Alleghany, Md Harrison, Va Hardy, Va Berkley, Va Bulloch, Ga Montgomery, Ga. . . Jackson, Ga Spartanburgh, S.C. Laurens, S.C Moore, N.C Randolph, N.C Lincoln, N.C 620 459 749 1,529 426 747 1,816 2,391 3,308 944 798 2,489 6,289 9,499 4,776 9,950 1,879 2,207 8,753 11,868 11,674 5,423 9,314 13,870 6,909 9,958 5,525 11,479 2,305 2,954 10,569 14,259 14,982 i 6,367 10,112 16,359 8.9 4.6 134 133 15s 25.2 17. 1 16.7 22.0 14.8 7-9 15-2 91. 1 95-4 86.6 86.7 81.5 74.8 82.9 833 78.0 85.2 92.1 84.8 $ 23,109 44,270 18,850 21,739 216,750 49,500 97,359 213,720 84,618 39,550 34,600 53,700 $ 3-34 4-44 3-41 1.89 9.40 16 -54 9.21 14.99 S-6s 4.22 342 328 St. Marys, Md Albermarle, Va. . . . Elizabeth City, Va. Henrico, Va Hertford, N.C Brunswick, N.C Orangeburgh, S.C. . Kershaw, S.C Wilkes, Ga Lincoln, Ga Columbia, Ga Greenville, N.C. . . . 6,000 9,226 1.734 4,856 2,805 2,254 6,564 4.847 7,284 2,212 5,980 7,746 6,974 9,042 1,864 5,109 3,247 2,524 6,66s 5,040 7,603 2,345 5,242 7,830 12,794 18,268 3,608 9,945 6,052 4,778 13,229 9,867 14,887 4,555 11,242 15,576 46.8 50.5 48.0 48.8 46.3 47.0 49.6 So/i 48.9 48.5 53-2 49.8 Si 49 52 51 53 53 SO 49 SI I 51S 46.8 50.2 45,000 95,564 17,700 33,500 44,823 14.300 10,031 36,859 104,255 32,726 103,140 120,000 3 52 5-23 4.91 336 741 2.99 0.76 3-74 7.00 7.18 9.02 7.70 Charles, Md Amelia, Va Cumberland, Va. Chesterfield, Va. . Beaufort, S.C . . Sumter, S.C Richland, B.C.... Liberty, Ga Mackintosh, Ga.. Chatham, Ga. . . . Warwick, Va. . . . Nottaway, Va. . . 12,435 7,186 6,102 6,oJ5 20,914 11,638 5,238 4,508 2,957 9,748 1,120 6,368 7,810 3,408 3,890 3,964 4,973 7,416 3,789 1,420 782 3,792 71S 2,910 20,245 10,594 9,99 9,979 25,887 19,054 9,027 6,228 3,739 13,540 1,835 9,278 61.4 67.8 61.0 60, 80, 61 58. 77 79 72 60 68.6 38.6 32.2 390 39-8 19-3 390 42.0 22.8 21 .0 28.0 40.0 31-4 81,524 75,709 56,172 31,255 27,736 89,388 22,993 5,662 1,500 4,038 7,347 48,543 4.03 715 5.62 13 07 36 55 91 40 0.29 4.00 523 1 86 Household Manufactures in the United States manufactures: (i) In Virginia and Maryland the presence of slaves in a county seems to have had little effect upon the output of the family factory, the per capita values being very much the same regardless of whether the number of slaves was smaller, larger, or equal to the free population. This fact suggests the extent to which the slaves must have been employed in such naanufacturing. (2) In Georgia the presence of a large number of slaves lessened the per capita value, while an equal number had little or no effect. (3) The presence of both a large and an equal number in South Carolina tended to decrease the amoimt of homemade goods. (4) This factor seems to have had no effect at all in North Carolina. It should be said in concluding this chapter that the census of household manufactures taken in the autumn of 1810 came at a time when the demands on the system were very heavy. The operations of the Embargo and Non- Intercourse acts forced upon the people an industrial self-sufficiency which they could not have sustained without the assistance of the home factory. The material in Tables XI and XII demonstrates the fact that the people quite generally accepted the conditions forced upon them by the foregoing measures. Until a general system of factory manufacturing could be estabUshed to supplement their agricultural and commercial activities and to make real a dreamed-of industrial independence from European countries, the people in all sections of the country had to maintain the family system of manu- facturing. The year 1808 is a rather important one in the economic history of thl§ gountry, It may be thought A Year's Output of the Family Factory 187 of as marking the beginning of an industrial revolution which by i860, along with other changes, had transferred the textile manufacturing business from homes to factories, thus putting an end to a system that so long had been such an important factor in the life and prosperity of the entire country. Since the story of the transition from family- to factory-made goods forms the subject of a succeeding chapter, no further consideration will be given it here. CHAPTER VI THE PRODUCTS OF THE FAMILY FACTORY The fact that the products, materials, and processes relative to the output of the family factory varied so little, both as to locality and as to chronology, makes it possible and desirable to treat these three phases of the subject in one chapter. In order to facilitate this treatment, the discussion centers on the products made in the family, these being grouped into the following three main divisions: (i) wearing apparel and household textile supplies; (2) household implements, utensils, furniture, necessities, and comforts; (3) farming implements, building materials, and general supplies. Every product of the household factory can be classified under these headings except pot and pearl ashes, the manufacture of which will be discussed in connection with soap-making because of the similarity of the material from which each was made. In order to call attention to the great variety of family- made goods and at the same time formulate an appropriate introduction to the chapter, the following list of articles is presented. It comprises the domestic staples which the Moravian Brethren proposed to contribute to a store which they opened in 1753 for the benefit of the "Family." This was one of the few stores on the forks of the Delaware at this time. The articles included in the list were:" Apron-skins, powder-horns, glue, shoes, slippers, shoe-lasts, wooden and horn heel pieces, saddle-trees, saddles, horse-collars, 188 The Products of the Family Factory 189 bridles, halters, saddle-bags, girths, pocket-books, martingales, straps, stockings, caps, gloves, socks, hats, felt caps and felt slippers, spinning-wheels, reels, boxes, guns, tea-caddies, writing-desks, deer and calf skins dressed for breeches, buckwheat groats, oat-groats, malt, millet, dried peaches, dried apples, dried cherries, rusks, ginger-bread, cakes, iron bands for chests, nails, plows, axes, hatchets, grubbing hoes, corn-hoes, grind-stones, whet-stones, punk, flint and steel, pipe-stems, pipe-heads, shirt studs, pewter plates, tea pots, lanterns, taUow candles, soap, starch, hair-powder, sealing-wax, wafers, tobacco boxes, buttons, buckles, spoons, bowls, shovels, brooms, baskets, wheat, flour, butter, cheese, handkerchiefs, neck- cloths, garters, knee-straps, linen, white, blue and checked woolens, currant-wine, beer, whiskey, tar, potash, turpentine, pitch, lamp- black, sulphur-matches, vinegar, flaxseed, linseed oil, rape seed and oil, nut oil, oil of sassafras, ammonia, rasped deer's-horn, bush-tea, medicine chests, brushes, shovels and tongs, chafing-dishes, combs, currycombs, glove-leather, leather-breeches, ropes, blank-books, soft-soap, rakes, knives, drawing-knives, guitars, violins, tobacco and tobacco-pouches, snuff, oil of turpentine, hemp, flax, buckets, milk pails, tubs, pottery, cotton yarn, cord, hatchels, oven-forks, linen nets, augers, hammers, pincers, candlesticks, tinware, chisels, mill-saws, homespun, boots, whips, harness, wheelbarrows, wagons, coffee-pots, chains, canoes, boards, bricks, roofing-tiles, lime, pre- serves and pickles, quills and slate pencils.' This list includes more than 160 dififerent articles — a wonderful example of how quickly a group of people living as one family could become economically independent when forced to do so by the exigencies of time and place. While many of the commodities, such as tobacco, millet, dried peaches, apples, and cherries, rape seed, hemp, flax, butter, and the like, cannot be classed as manufactured products in the sense in which they are used in this ' Reichel (editor), Memorials of the Moravian Church, I, 234 £., note. iQO Household Manufactures in the United States discussion, yet, when all of these have been eliminated, the hst is a long one and full of meaning/ WEARING APPAREL AND HOUSEHOLD TEXTILE SUPPLIES It has probably occurred again and again to the reader, before reaching this phase of the discussion, that wearing apparel was the most important as well as the most con- sistent product of the family factory. Most of the legisla- tion in the colonies bearing on the subject of household manufactures had to do with providing raw material for clothing and manufacturing it into some kind of cloth; most of the reports on what was made in the homes dealt chiefly with articles of clothing. In fact, so much has been said in the foregoing discussion concerning the making of this one commodity in the homes that one is likely to forget that anything else was really made. To explain why wearing apparel and" household textile supplies composed such a large portion of the output of the family factory is not at all diflicult. Soon after a new settlement was made, a sawmill, a gristmill, a dis- tillery, and a brewery would appear; so the period of the grater, mortar, handmill, sawpit, private still, and brewery was usually short. A blacksmith, carpenter, cooper, shoemaker, hat-maker, and other handicraftsmen would ' It would be a little misleading to convey the idea that the articles in the foregoing list were ordinarily made in the average Moravian home. The fact that these people lived as one big family gave opportunity for specialization that was uncommon in ordinary communities. This possi- bility of specialization explains some of the articles appearing in the list, which should not, in the strict sense of the term, be considered as family manufactures. The Products of the Family Factory 191 also be plying their trades in a short time after the settle- ment was estabUshed.' While the professional weaver was also on the ground quite early, yet there was so much competition by the women who chose to do their own work that he did not get on in his trade as his brother-handi- craftsmen did in theirs. After the spinning and weaving industries had become established in the home, it was difficult to crowd them out. In fact, even after the factory came to do the work of the handicraft system, its development along the line of textile industries was retarded by the tenacity with which the women held on to their spinning-wheels and looms. The chief raw materials used in the manufacture of textile fabrics were wool, hemp, flax, and cotton. When the settlers arrived at Plymouth, they found an abundance of hemp and flax growing wild.'' Since the cultivation of these plants was not entirely new to them, they had little difficulty in producing a sufficient quantity of such material for their household necessities. In order to safeguard the supply, regulations were early established and encouragements offered for their cultivation.^ This ' For example, in the towns of Washington, Pittsburgh, Bedford, and Huntingdon, Pennsylvania, in 1790 there were respectively 32, 40, 15, and 23 artisans plying their trades. Among these there were but 6 weavers. Similar conditions existed even in the older communities. Lancaster, in the same state, had, in 1786, but 25 weavers out of a total of 234 artisans (Coxe, A View of the U.S., pp. 311 f.). 2 "Journal of a Plantation Settled at Plymouth in New England; First printed in 1622," reprint from Purchas' Pilgrims, Book X, chap, iv, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Colls., ist ser., VIII, 221 ff. Original was probably written by one of the company. 3 See chap, ii, pp. 29 ff., for these early laws, 192 Household Manufactures in the United States was more especially true in New England, where there was so much dependence on the products of these staples for ship supphes. In the course of time their growth became common throughout the country except in certain sections of the South. Conditions remained thus until about 1810, at which time the manufacture of linen in the household began to decline, owing to the rapid growth of cotton culture and manufacture and the introduction of merino sheep. The regular estabUshments for the manufacture of both cotton and wool which had grown up by this date also contributed to the diminution of household spinning and weaving into which flax and hem^p entered so largely as materials.' Wool was an important as well as a necessary com- modity in a region where suitable clothing was so scarce. Whether for the fleeces or for other purposes, sheep were brought to the colonies quite early in their history. One writer says that they were introduced into Jamestown in 1609,^ and another that by 1649 there were 3,000 head in Virginia.^ Massachusetts had 1,000 in 1642.'' The Dutch sent sheep to New Netherlands in 1625 and 1630; and in 1683 the Delaware colony had eighty.^ All the legisla- tion cited in chap, ii regarding the pasturing, protecting, and exporting of sheep is evidence of their importance to the New England and middle colonies. As the population ' Eighth Census of U.S., Manufactures, Introd., p. cvii. ' Ibid., p. xxvi. 3 "A Perfect Description of Virginia," Force, Tracts, II, sec. 8, p. 3. 4 "New England's First Fruits," Mass. Hist. Soc. Colls., ist ser., 1, 247, s Eighth Census of U.S., Manufactures, Introd., p. xxvi. The Products of the Family Factory 193 increased in these regions, the number of sheep increased accordingly. In time practically every farmer owned a small flock, which was in reality a necessity forced upon him by the economic conditions under which he lived. The inventories examined in both Rhode Island and New York contained sheep as one of the most common entries.' Both Massachusetts and Connecticut obtained cotton from the West Indies before 1643. In the latter colony the governor ordered the supply, which was apportioned to the towns when it arrived.^ At this date flax and wool were scarce, and until they became more plentiful much cotton was used. Most of the supply came from the West Indies until about 1800. During the seventeenth century from about 1659 to 1678 it sold in the shops for from is. to 15. /\d. a poimd.3 The returns of the marshals in the fall of 1810 indicated how extensively and in what locaUties wool, flax, hemp, and cotton were used in the manufacture of textiles in the family.'' Homemade woolen goods were common in all the counties of the New England and middle states, in the majority of those in the western country, and in many in the South; linen goods were quite generally made in famihes in all sections of the country; cotton fabrics were common in the South and at the same time were ' Early Rec. of Providence, R.I., XVT; and Vlsler County, N.Y., Probate Records, "WiUs," II. ' Winthrop, Hist, of N. Eng. ("Orig. Nar. Early Am. Hist." ed.), II, 122, and Col. Rec. of Conn., I, 59. 3 Judd, Hist, of Hadley (ed. 1863), p. 389, note. " See Tables XI and XII. 194. Household Manufactures in the United States found in great abundance north of Maryland — a statement also true of mixed cloths of all kinds. Besides the materials discussed above, a few others were used in cases of sheer necessity. These were buffalo wool, lint of the wild nettle, and cattle's hair. The pioneers west of the Alleghanies had to resort to such materials to supply their needs for clothing. George Wiley, speaking of early times in Natchez, Mississippi, said: "I have often heard my mother say that when it was impossible to procure cloth, she clothed herself and the children with a very nice linen from the large nettles that grew near the fort "^ The early settlers in Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, and Ohio were also obliged to resort to the same kind of material. Until these people had time to raise a crop of flax they used the lint from the bark of dead nettles. This was collected in the spring by all people of a station acting together, a portion of the men standing guard while the rest with the help of the women and children gathered the dead stalks. From the lint of these many dozen cuts of linen as fine as flax but not so strong were spun."" It was said of a part of Indiana about 1820: "The nettles grew very plentiful in Cicero bottoms, and during the winter it was found that they had as good lint as flax or hemp, and in the spring they were in good condition for working up. We all had shirts, pants, towels, sheets, and under-bed ticks made of these nettles."^ ■ " Recollections," Claiborne, Miss, as Prov., Ter.,and Slate, App., p. 532. ' Roosevelt, Winning of the West, 1, 317. 3 Finch, "Recollections," Ind. Mag. Hist., VI, 78. The Prodiicts of the Family Factory 195 When sheep's wool could not be secured, cattle's hair and buffalo wool were occasionally used instead, the former mainly east, and the latter west, of the Alleghanies. While the inhabitants of New Hampshire were yet living under pioneer conditions, they seem to have resorted to cattle's hair to take the place of sheep's wool. A supply of this material could be obtained from the tannery. It was spun into yarn, which was later made into bedcovers and other necessary articles.' The very first settlers in northern Ohio had to resort to the same sort of material for requisite supphes. In his account of early conditions near Cleveland, Ohio, Badger says: "Mr. Burke's family in Euclid had been in this lone situation over three years. The woman had been obliged to spin and weave cattle's hair to make covering for her children's bed."^ It was quite common in New York as late as 1808 to mix wool with the hair from the tannery in variable proportions.' It was also customary for the people west of the mountains to spin buffalo wool into yam. In fact, until it was possible to protect the sheep from the wolves and other wild animals, buffalo wool was their chief reUance. Speak- ing of the early conditions at Bryant's Station, Kentucky, Durrett remarked: "After the clothes with which they came from the mother-country were reduced to rags that could no longer be patched, the men wore buckskin ' Norton, The Hist, of FitzwilUam, N.H., p. in. ^ Quoted by Whittlesey, Early Hist, of Cleveland, Ohio, p. 384. Badger came to the Reserve in 1800 as a missionary from the Connecticut Missionary Society. 3 Trans, of Albany Inst., IV, 116. 196 Household Manufactures in the United States breeches, hunting-shirts, and moccasins, with raccoon or fox skin caps; and the women, such coarse linsey gowns as they could make by spinning on the httle wheel and weaving on the hand loom the lint of the wild nettle and the wool of the buffalo."' The use of these unusual materials by the pioneers is a capital illustration of the power of a people to adapt themselves to trying situations and in a large measure overcome them. Materials for textile manufactures were by no means the only ones used by the family to supply wearing apparel and household supplies. Buffalo hides, cowhides, buck- skins, squirrel, raccoon, rabbit, bear, wolf, fox, cat, wood- chuck, and beaver skins furnished stuff from which to make coverings for the head and feet, as well as body clothing. Buffalo skins were used for robes, blankets, and wraps of all sorts. From them moccasins were also made. Deerskins were made into hunting-shirts, pantaloons, coats, waistcoats, leggings, moccasins, and petticoats.' Gloves and mittens were made from the skins of squirrels and beavers; caps, from the skins of raccoons, bears, foxes, cats, rabbits, and woodchucks.^ Bearskins were ' "How They Lived at Bryant's Station," Filson Club Pubs., No. 12, p. 27; also Roosevelt, op. cit., Ill, 204. ' Strickland, Autobiography of Rev. James P. Finley, p. 74. Finley's father was a missionary in the Carolinas and Georgia until about 1 785, at which time he moved to Kentucky, where he lived till the end of the century. The subject of the Autobiography tells of life as he saw it in Ohio and Kentucky about 1800. 3 Hats for summer wear were often made out of oat straw, rye straw, flags, or the inside bark of the mulberry root (Vogel, "Homelife in Early Indiana," Ind. Mag. of Hist., X, 13). The Products of the Family Factory 197 made into beds and bedding; and from the deerskins and cowhides, moccasins, shoepacks, and shoes were made.' The preparation of the foregoing leather materials and their manufacture into useful articles was largely the work of the men and boys. Since this was true, the trades producing articles from them were among the first to gain a substantial foothold in a new settlement. The shoemaker, saddle-maker, and harness-maker soon appeared in the community and were shortly able to depend entirely upon their trade for a living. These tradesmen reUeved the farmers of the difficult task of working up their own leather, since it could be exchanged at their shops for the finished products. An early independence in leather resulted from these conditions. Such an independence was common in practically all isolated communities — a situation not at all surprising. The high cost of freight from the interior towns almost prohibited the transporta- tion of rawhides, one of the commonest products of the farm. This made the tannery a necessary adjunct to every village in order to save this very important product. With an abundant supply of hides, a number of tanneries, shoemakers, and harness-makers in a community, there was Httle need of outside aid to supply commodities made of leather.* ' References on the use of such materials as are discussed in this para- graph could be given in great numbers. The following are sufficient to sustain all facts in the paragraph: Parker, "Pioneer Life," Ind. Mag. of Hist., in, 183 f.; Little, Hist, of Weare, N.H., pp. i8i f.; King, Ohio, p. 299; Levering, Historic Ind., chap, vi; and Roosevelt, op. cit.. Ill, 204 f. ' Bishop, op. cit., I, chap, xvi, discusses the whole subject of leather manufactures. 198 Household Manufactures in the United States It should not be inferred from the foregoing paragraph that the farmer never had to tan his own hides and make his own leather clothing, boots, and shoes. All this he certainly had to do, sometimes for only a brief period, but quite often for a long one if he persisted in Hving on the extreme frontier, where the number of settlers was too small to justify a tannery, shoemaker, etc. It was the custom tmder such conditions for each man to tan his own leather, unless he could secure it already tanned from the Indians, and to work it up into indispensable articles. To be tanned, the skins were thrown into a vat of strong lye after they had been weU dried. The lye caused the hair to loosen and fall off. They were then placed in another vat of Uquid made from black-oak bark and allowed to remain several months. When taken out of this they were scraped, and softened with bear's oil. They were then ready to be made into suits, boots, shoes, and harness.' As suggested in a preceding paragraph, the tailoring of the leather suits usually fell to the male portion of the family, since the hard material was rather difficult for the women to handle. For the men it was a simple process. Large needles or shoemakers' awls were used in the sewing process. The thread was made either of the sinews from the legs of the deer, or by cutting a long strip from the deerskin. The latter was called "whang." It was cut as small as possible, so that it could be used in the awls or needles as thread. While the product of this crude tailoring was often rough and uncomfortable, especially after getting wet and stiff, it was certainly the best that ■ Vogel, op. cit., X, 17; also Cockrum, A Pioneer Hist, oflnd., p. 194. The Products of the Family Factory 199 could have been devised for the wild country in which it was used. It protected the men and boys from nettles, briars, snakes, and the cold winter winds. Its greatest asset, however, was its cheapness, since it could be had by anyone with sufficient energy to secure the skins, and dress, tan, and make them into the requisite articles of wearing apparel.' Some idea of the prevalence of leather wearing apparel among slaves and servants during much of the colonial period can be obtained from the newspaper extracts of advertisements of runaways in New Jersey. For example, from 1704 to 1739, out of a total of 97 cases, 32 had on apparel made of leather, buckskin, or bearskin; from 1740 to 1750, 36 out of 13s; from 1751 to 1755, 64 out of 151; from 1756 to 1761, 20 out of 50, and similarly for the remainder of the period to 1779.^ While these figures present conditions in respect to servants and slaves in but one colony, yet there is abundant evidence that such » Duncan, "Old Settlers' Papers," Ind. Hist. Soc. Pubs., II, 391 ff. It should be noted that as soon as a store appeared within reach, the settler could take his skins and exchange them for merchandise, and thus save himself and his wife the work of making the leather garments and the laborious task of spinning and weaving the cloth used by the family. The price he received for his hides depended on the ease and safety of the trans- portation facilities to the settlement. In the early Indiana settlements the prices were as follows : for a good deerskin taken in season, 50 cents in trade; for a raccoon, 375 cents; and for a muskrat, 25 cents. The proper season for the deer was from the first of May to the middle of November, and for the raccoon, muskrat, and similar skins, from the first of December to the first of April. Thus the hunter could follow his trade almost the year around and from the exchange of his wares furnish himself and his family with whatever could be bought at the few stores (ibid., p. 393). ' See Table VI. 200 Household Manufactures in the United States apparel was common for a time among all classes in frontier settlements.' The shoemaking business in New England had attained enormous proportions some time before the Revolution. In the year 1767, 80,000 pairs of shoes were made in Lynn, Massachusetts.^ In fact, as early as 1650 this colony was manufacturing shoes for sale in the other colonies.' There seems to be no way to determine just how much of this work was done in the homes by members of the family, how much by the itinerant shoemaker, and how much in the shoemakers' shops. It is probable that in New England and the middle colonies during the seventeenth century the making of the majority of leather goods was done by the men and boys as a household industry. The abimdance of material made the manufacture of shoes, boots, moccasins, shoe packs, leather coats, vests, breeches, and leggings a profitable household industry in both of these regions. To insure a sufficient supply of raw material in Massachusetts the General Court in 1640 enjoined upon the population the preservation of hides. A fine of five shillings was imposed for each hide not sent to the tannery. Leather searchers whose duty was to see that the law was enforced were appointed by each town."" Such care in the preservation of hides augmented the supply of leather 'Levering, op. cit., chap, vi; Baird, op. cit., p. 128; Wilkeson, "Recol- lections of the West," Pubs. Buffalo Hist. Soc, V, 154; same in Am. Pioneer, II, 160; Duncan, op. cit., II, 377 ff. = Essex Antiquarian, V, 55. 3 Coman, Indust. Hist, of U.S., p. 66. * Rec. 0} Gov. and Co. Mass. Bay, I, 305, 356. The Products of the Family Factory 201 and made possible a surplus of leather goods, which found a ready market in the other colonies. The shoemaking industry seems to have been among the first to pass into the shop stage. The occasional appearance of shoemakers' tools in the Providence inven- tories covering the period from 1716 to 1726 indicates that shoes were then made in the homes either by resident or by itiaerant shoemakers, while the total absence of these tools in the New York inventories covering the period from 1787 to 1792 suggests that the industry in Ulster County had migrated to the shops.' It should be noted, however, that among the farmers some distance from a market for their hides, and in frontier communities, the business remained in the household long after it had passed into the shops in the towns and villages and in districts favorably situated in respect to trade and trans- portation. Even as late as the middle of the eighteenth century many of the farmers and their families in Essex County, Massachusetts, spent long winter evenings in makiag shoes from the sides of leather tanned from their own animals and from those they had purchased. The wives and daughters did the binding and closing, and the sons helped with the sewing and pegging, after pegs began to be used. Some worked by the fireplace, but generally a small building was built near the house, in which the men worked. When the winter's work was done, or the leather was all made up, the farmers carried their shoes to some trade center and sold or bartered them.^ Furthermore, negro shoemakers were common on the plantations, where " See pp. 81 fE., 136 f . = Essex Antiquarian, V, 54- 202 Household Manufactures in the United States they made shoes for themselves and sometimes for sale.' On the whole, it was a business that neither the plantation owners nor the ordinary farmers the country over were hasty about relinquishing. They were justified in their tardiness both by the convenience and the profitableness of the industry. As suggested above, the spinning and weaving industries remained in the homes long after others had passed into shops or factories. Because of their continued importance in the economic life and prosperity of the people in all sections of the country, a somewhat extended discussion of the processes and products of these operations seems desirable, both of which are very important in this con- sideration, since they exemplify so well the persistence and ingenuity of the chief operators of the family factory. The variety of homemade textile products was very great, especially when they were colored and in their final form. Some notion of this variety is obtained from the descriptions of the homespun clothing worn by runaway servants and slaves. The following articles of apparel are t3^ical ones from a large number mentioned and described as homespun in advertisements of fugitive slaves and servants in New Jersey from 1707 to 1776: "homespun olive colored coat," "homespun white shirt," "brown colored homespun drugget coat," "homespim coarse shirt," "home- spim striped breeches," "brown or black homespun jacket," "home- spun coat lined with blue," "homespun coat of black and white worsted and wool," "homespun gray coat lined with orange stuff," "dark colored homespun coat and jacket," "homespun gray ' Scott, Hist, of Orange Co., Va., p. 121. The Products of the Family Factory 203 stockings," "smt of dark gray homespun cloth," "suit of light gray homespun drugget cloth," "new homespun blue striped trousers," "dark brown homespun kersey coat," "homespun worsted knit stockings,'' "gray woolen homespun coat," "cinnamon homespun kersey coat lined with broad striped homespun," "brown homespun jacket," "olive colored homespun breeches and jacket," "brown homespun breeches," "homespun gown of green woolen yarn," "dark colored homespun broadcloth jacket," "short homespun gown and petticoat with red, blue, green, and black stripes ....," "homespim black jacket," "white homespun jacket," "homespun striped woolen jacket," "homespun coat of woolen and cotton lined," "moss colored homespun coat lined with brown homespim," "homespun blue and white striped linen jacket and breeches," "blue gray homespun drugget coat," "striped homespun waistcoat and breeches."' Such a list is by no means exhaustive, but long enough to show the great variation in the simple articles of clothing made from the homespun cloth. All these variations were largely due to the ingenuity of the women in diversify- ing the products of their labors by means of combining and coloring them. The chief textile products of the home factory were plain linen, woolen, and cotton cloth; mixtures of wool and flax, cotton and flax, cotton and wool, known as Unsey-woolsey, fustian, and jeans; tow cloth, made from the coarsest fiber of the flax; ducking, chiefly from hemp and used for sailcloth; ordinary cotton, linen, and woolen yarn; linen, cotton, woolen, and worsted stockings; mittens, leggings, lace, and edging; white and colored thread; coverlets and counterpanes in which much ingenu- ity was displayed in the weaving of the various ornamental •■ Ante, p. 91, for the reference to where these advertisements are found. 204 Household Manufactures in the United States figures and colors; and carpets, most of which were made after the Revolution. The plain linen and woolen cloth and linsey-woolsey were most common in New England and in the middle colonies; fustian in the South; and jeans, fustian, and linsey-woolsey in the country west of the Alleghanies. Lace, edging, thread, and sailcloth were made chiefly in New England; while stockings, mittens, leggings, carpets, coverlets, and counterpanes were more or less common in all parts of the country. It should be added, in concluding this Ust, that silk thread was occasionally spun and woven into cloth, and a kind of cloth called "taurino" was made of sheep's wool and cattle's hair, the former chiefly in Connecticut and the latter in New York. The existence of many combinations and variations in the cloth made of cotton, wool, and flax has been mentioned in a preceding paragraph. Some of these were due to the coloring of the yarn before it was woven into cloth, others to the fineness or coarseness of the threads, and still others to the color of the wool. For example, " sheep's gray " was made by mixing white and black wool^ the universal material from which, in some sections of the country, men's clothing was made.' Besides the ordinary tow cloth, there was the coarse linen, used chiefly for ordinary summer shirts, frocks, underclothing, trousers, towels, tablecloths, sheets, and pillowcases; fine linen, from which under- garments were made, as well as towels, tablecloths, and sheets; the fine striped and checked linen, used for aprons, gowns, handkerchiefs, shirts for the men, and the coarser ' Musgrove, Hist, of Bristol, N.H., I, 99. The Products of the Family Factory 205 sort for bedticks; diaper, diamond linen, and fine crash, all used mainly for towels and table covers/ Woolen cloth varied all the way from the coarse plain cloth to the fine worsted. The two kinds most in. Use were the pressed and fulled. The former was simply dyed and dressed, while the latter was dyed, fulled, sheared, and pressed. There was also a kind known as baize, woven for women's use and without fulling or napping. The dressed cloth was the most common, since the fulHng process was difl&cult when no fuUing-mill was in the neighborhood. Besides clothing for the men, women, and children, heavy blankets were woven from woolen yarn; and a comfortable sort of coverlet, used for a sheet in winter and a light blanket in summer, was made of a cotton warp filled with wool. Checked woolens used for shawls, imderskirts, dresses, and bedcovers were also common, as were fine, coarse, striped, and checked cotton cloths, used for bedticking, coverlids, shirts for the men and boys, and gowns for the women and girls. While all these • The price charged by professional weavers furnishes some information as to the fineness of the different kinds of woven cloth. The following is from an old account book covering the period between 1745 and 1772: "Tow Cloth and Tow Linen, woven at s and 6 pence a yard, fine Linen, gd. Cotton and Linen, id. and lod. Sacking, ^d. and ^. Linsey-Woolsey, id., plain Woolen Cloth 6|d. and fine, &d. Checked Linen and Checked Woolen, &d., fine check, lod. Checked Cotton, gd. Bed-tick, gd. and lod., fine Cotton Bed tick, i^. id. Diaper, lod. and i\d. Diamond Table Linen, Sd. and gd. Birdseye, 8d., fiiie Wale, jd. Striped or Streaked Cloth, M., Crape, M. Blanketing, id., fine Crash, gd. Coverlids, 6^. &d. each" (from Samuel Gaylord's Account Book; quoted by Judd, Hist, of Hadley, p. 39s). 2o6 Household Manufactures in the United States combinations and variations were more or less common, yet the fact should be kept in mind that the cloths most commonly made in the homes were linsey-woolsey, jeans, and tow linen. The ordinary clothing of the women and girls was usually made of the first; that of the men and boys, of the second; and that of the slaves in the South, of the third— much of which was sent down from New England.' In order to appreciate the textile products of the household factory discussed above, it is necessary to know something of the labor connected with the turning of the raw materials into the useful articles of clothing and textile supplies. Those of us who have no recollection of the era of domestic spinning-wheels and handlooms can hardly appreciate the labor of manufacturing cloth from wool, flax, or cotton by hand. The operations connected with the fabrication of linen, woolen, and cotton cloth were both numerous and . laborious. For Unen, they were braking, swingling, combing or hatcheling, spinning, reeling, weaving, bleaching, and coloring; for woolen, carding or braking, spinning, weaving, fuUing, "teaseling," dyeing, and dressing; and for cotton, much the same processes as for wool, omitting fulling and dressing. A brief description of these processes seems desirable, so ' To avoid duplications, references on the foregoing products of tiie home factory and their combinations and variations are all given here. The main ones are: Brown, Hist, of Hampton Falls, N.H., p. 506; Moore, Hist. ofCandia, N.H., p. 265; Hayes, Hist, of Rockingham, Vt., pp. 93 f.; Street, Hist, of Mount Desert, Me., p. 290; Tucker, Hist, of Hartford, Vt., p. 100; Trans. Albany Inst., IV, 116; Doddridge, Notes (ed. 1912), p. 113; Duncan, op. cit., p. 390; Hamilton Papers (1790-91), No. 1764. The Products of the Family Factory 207 that the reader may reaKze just what it cost in time and labor to produce sufl&cient clothing and household textiles for a family in the days of homespun industries. In order to insure a supply of flax it was necessary for the farmer to have a patch in the garden or elsewhere. This patch was small even though the family was large, since a good yield on half an acre would have furnished enough for the whole state of Connecticut at the time the greatest amount was used.^ When the flax was ripe in the fall it was usually pulled and placed upon the ground, where it remained for some time, to rot.^ If the season was damp, the woody portion rotted and the fiber became pliable in a few weeks. If the farmer wished to save the seed, he puUed it carefully by the roots and tied it into small bundles which he left on the ground a day or so to dry. He then set it up in small shocks, and after it had become well dried it was stacked in the field a fortnight or more, when the seeds were threshed out. The stocks were then placed in water for a week or more when they were spread out upon the grass to be rotted, just as was the custom when the seed was not saved. After the woody portion was well rotted the flax was gathered up and packed away for the winter, imless the family was in need of a fresh supply of linen. During the winter or early spring it was dressed. The first operation in this process ^Hamilton Papers (1790-91), No. 1841. = For accounts of the preparation of flax for spinning, see Duncan, op. cit., p. 389; Bouton, Hist, of Concord, N.H., p. 527; Brown, op. cit., p. 506; Kingman, Hist, of North Bridgewater, Mass., p. 367; Weston, Hist, of Middleboro, Mass., p. 212. 2o8 Household Manufactures in the United States was braking, which was done by means of a clumsy home- made arrangement called a flax brake, used to bruise the woody part in order to separate it from the fiber. After the fiber was separated, it was swingled, which was done by beating it with a wooden paddle called a swingling- knife. In this operation aU the woody portion was removed, after which it was ready to be turned over to the women, as all the work up to the carding or hatcheling process was usually done by the men and the boys. When the flax came into the hands of women and girls, the first process was to hatchel it. One writer has described this process as follows: ". . . . first, the hatchel was brought and fastened into a chair with a string or stick, and the mother, with her checked apron, and a handkerchief pinned about her neck, and another hand- kerchief tied about her head to keep off the dust, sat in another chair. Winding one end of the flax tightly around the fingers of the right hand, and holding it, she drew the flax through the hatchel,' till it was thoroughly combed; changing, she combed in a similar manner the other end."' Hatcheling took out the short and broken portions, called tow, which was used for making the coarser cloth, wrapping- twine, and ropes. When the flax had been combed suffi- ciently, which was often many times, since the quality of the cloth depended upon the fineness of the fibers, it was put upon the distaff and spun upon the Uttle wheel, ' An mstrument made of nail rods with pointed teeth about six inches in length, seven rows with twelve in a row (Brown, op. cit., p. 506). Since the combs or hatchels were homemade, no doubt the variations were about as nimierous as the makers. " Kingman, op. cit., p. 367. The Products of the Family Factory 209 an implement about twenty inches in diameter and oper- ated by the foot resting upon a treadle. It usually had two grooves in the circumference, one to receive the band to drive the fliers, the other to drive the spool with quicker motion to receive the thread/ Except the fulling, shearing, and pressing of the woolen cloth after it was woven, the process of converting the raw wool into the finished product was very similar to that of flax and needs no elaborate description. In brief, the steps were as follows: first, the fleeces were torn to pieces, and all the dirt and burrs carefully picked out, as well as the tarred locks, draglocks, brands, and feltings. Occa- sionally the white locks that had been carefully separated were dyed at this stage of the process. After breaking, came carding, then combing. Before the wool was carded it was greased, occasionally with rape oil, but more often with melted swine grease, which had to be thoroughly " The spinning process has been admirably described by Bolles as follows: "In the household manufacture of our forefathers the spinning apparatus was a wheel, which drove a single horizontal spindle mounted on a standard at about the height of the elbow. A cord, passing around the circumference of the big fly-wheel, drove the spindle at a great velocity. The end of the roll of wool, flax, or cotton, was attached to the spindle by simply tying it around, and the big wheel was started. Simultaneously with the starting of the wheel, the spinner brought back her hand holding the roll of fibre, so as to stretch it at the same time that the spindle, on its longitudinal axis was giving the roll the twist; then, without stopping the wheel, the spinner suddenly relaxed the strain on the yam, and let her hand come quickly up to the end of the spindle, by which means the yam wound itself up on the spindle instantaneously instead of continuing to twist. As soon as this process had been repeated enough times to secure a spindle full of yam, the wheel was stopped and the yam reeled off upon ;a wooden reel into hanks for knitting, weaving, or sewing'' (Jndust. Hist, of U.S. [3d ed., 1881], p. 421). 2IO Household Manufactures in the United States worked in. The carder simply drew a tuft of wool across the card several times until a considerable quantity had been caught in the wire teeth; then a second card was drawn across the first several times until the fibers ran parallel. The carded wool was then made into small rolls ready for ordinary spinning. For hard-twisted spinning it had to be combed, which was a more skilful operation than carding. Two hot T-shaped combs were used. The wool was placed on one and with the other combed into a long staple. The part combed out was spun into coarse yarn. If a close thread was desired, the yarn was spun twice. The single-spun yarn was used for knitting; the double was woven into a stiff, wiry cloth.^ Because the woolen cloth as it came from the loom was stiff, wiry, and very uncomfortable to wear, it was sub- jected to what was termed fulling, in order to soften it. In the fulling-mill this process consisted of wetting it thoroughly with warm soap and water, after which it was vigorously pounded with great oaken mallets. Before the advent of a fulling-mill into a community the cloth was fulled by beating it with sticks, or if the young folks wished to have a party, it was kicked instead of beaten. An old-fashioned fuUing-party has been described as follows: When the cloth of the season was woven, the young people were invited to the house, the kitchen floor was cleared for action, and in the middle were placed stout splint bottom chairs in a circle, connected by a cord to prevent recoU. On these the yoimg men sat ' For fuller descriptions than the one given above, see Weston, op. cU., p. 214; Smith, Hist, of Peterborough, N.H., pp. 75 £E.; Sibley, Hist, of Union, Lincoln Co., Mass., pp. 108 fif.; McClellan, Hist, of Gorham, Me., pp. 329 ff.; Earle, op. cit., chap. ix. The Products of the Family Factory 211 with shoes and stockings off and trousers rolled to the knee. In the center were placed the cloths, wetted with warm soap suds, and then the kicking commenced by measured steps, driving the bundles of goods roimd and round the circle, until they were shnmk to the desired size. Then the girls, bare to the elbows, rinsed and wrung out the flannels and blankets, and hung them on the fence to dry.' Coloring, dyeing, and bleaching were very important processes in the manufacture of textile commodities in the home.'^ Sometimes the raw materials were colored before they were spun, but usually it was the thread, yarn, or cloth on which the women exercised their inherent sense of color. The highest handicraft of the women's work was most frequently seen in selecting, manufacturing, and using the various colors. Before the advent of the ill- smelling dyepot into New England the woods furnished the materials for coloring. Sumach and the bark of the black oak, chestnut, and other trees were much used. Hickory bark or peach leaves furnished the yellows; black and white walnut bark or hulls, the browns, or rusty black when mixed with sumach berries; sumach berries alone, the deep, warm reds; oak and maple, the shades of purple; and cedar berries, the delicate dove or lead colors. When it was possible to secure indigo, green vitriol, alum, copperas, cochineal, or madder, the process ' "New England Wool Manufactures," N. Eng. States, I, 191. = On coloring and dyeing, see Judd., op. cit., p. 388; Griffin, Hist, of Keene, N.H., p. 323; Williams, "The Home-Spun Age," Mag. Am. Hist.^ XXX, 241; Drake, Pioneer Life in Ky., p. loo; Parker, op. cit., p. 183; Little, Hist, of Weare, N.H., p. 182; Wayland, Hist, of Rockingham Co., Va., p. 382; Clute, Annals of Stolen Island, pp. 77 f., and Brown, op. cit., p. 506. 212 Household Manufactures in the United States was much simplified. With these prepared coloring materials were combined the products of the forest and the field. Indigo was mixed with the flowers of the goldenrod and alum to make green. Sassafras was used instead of the goldenrod if yellow or orange was desired. Pokeberry was boiled with alum to make crimson; sorrel with logwood and copperas made black; and oak bark with indigo gave a brownish red. In the South a good yellow was made of the horse-laurel, and an excellent black from the leaves and berries of the gallberry bush. The root of the barberry and the leaves of the devil's-bit gave a beautiful yellow, as did the petals of the Jerusalem artichoke and St. John's wort. While all these combina- tions, and indeed many others, were made, yet the standard dye was indigo. It was either bought of peddlers going about the country or of neighborhood traders, or the plants were grown and the dye manufactured in the home. The dye pot or tub filled with its malodorous mixture of indigo and urine had an important place near the kitchen fire in most New England homes. Judd thinks that our foremothers began to dye blue with indigo before 1700, in order to make stripes and checks, and that it became a common practice before the end of the first quarter of the eighteenth century.^ It was from these checks and stripes of wool, flax, and cotton, made possible by the presence of the dyetub in the chimney corner, that most of the shirts, trousers, aprons, gowns, and bedticks were made. To bring the linen to the desired "degree of showiness" required many bleachings, both of the yarn and of the " Op. cit., p. 380. The Products of the Family Factory 213 cloth. One writer, speaking of her mother in connection with bleaching linen cloth, remarks: "I have heard her say that to bring the fine Knen for shirts to the required degree of showiness no less than thirty and sometimes forty bleachings were necessary.'" These forty bleachings refer to the cloth only. It should be remembered that the skeins of thread no doubt had gone through an equal number before they were woven. For bleaching, these were first placed in warm water for three or four days, which was frequently changed, the skeins being continually wrung out. After this treatment they were washed in clear pure water from the spring or brook. Then they were treated with ashes and hot water over and over again, and finally placed in clear water for another week or so. On being taken out of this they were seethed, rinsed, beaten, washed, and dried, and finally wound on bobbins ready for the loom. The bleaching was sometimes done with slaked lime or buttermilk instead of ashes .^ If the mother desired a whiter cloth than was produced from the carefully bleached thread, she spread the rolls out on the green grass and fastened the corners down with loops and sticks. Pure water was then carried and sprinkled over the outspread linen. This process was repeated hour after hour and from day to day until the sun had whitened the cloth to the mother's satisfaction.^ It often took weeks to bring it to the desired shade. To make the cloth pure white, it was sometimes soaked in buttermilk. ' Smith, Colonial Days and Ways, p. 70. " Earle, op. cit., p. 175. ' Drake, op. cU., p. 103. 214 Household Manufactures in the United States Reeling, spinning, and even weaving silk became household pursuits in some parts of New England after the Revolution. The principal center of the industry was in eastern Connecticut/ Sewing-silk, from which lace, ribbons, and handkerchiefs were made, was the commonest product. Occasionally dress goods were also made. These compared with the machine-made silk about as favorably as the homespun linen or woolen did with the fine linen or broadcloth. In his report to Hamil- ton in 1791,^ Constant Southworth stated that the product was really of a good quality, and that by force of genius and application some people had wrought it into most useful and elegant §ilk fabrics, particularly handkerchiefs, buttons, and ribbons. The ribbons were flexible enough to tie up the hair, "for which purpose they were worn by the Honourable Mr. Wadsworth, Representa- tive in Congress, and by the Honble. Mr. Chester, and other gentlemen in this State." The report concluded thus : The culture of the Mvilbeny tree is increasing, and I believe it would be very easy in a few years for most families in this State to produce annually each, one pound weight of raw silk without injury to other domestic business, this with the larger quantities that would naturally be raised by many, whose situation was favor- able in a particular degree, would find employment for some and amusement for others, and supersede the necessity of importing an Article which has long drained this State of her Money and richest Commodities ' The value of the sewing-silk made in Tolland, Windham, and New London counties in 1810 amounted to $28,503 (Coxe, "Digest of Manu- factures,'' Am. State Papers, "Finance," II, 736). " For the report, see Hamilton Papers (1790-91), Nos. 1828, 1829. The Products of the Family Factory 215 Another household industry that grew up ui some sections of New England after the Revolution was the manufacture of lace and edging. Fessenden asserts that in 1790 no less than 4,197 yards of silk and thread lace were made in the town of Ipswich, Massachusetts, by the women and children and sold in Boston and other mer- cantile towns/ This statement is corroborated by reports to the Secretary of the Treasury in 1791, which stated that in various parts of Massachusetts the women made lace and edging for their own use and some for sale, and that in Ipswich no less than 600 persons did more or less of it — some devoting most of their time to the business, others only at intervals, all independent of each other.* The machinery used was very simple, consisting only of a round, or perhaps elliptical pillow, from eight to twelve inches in diameter, encircled by a strip of parchment or pasteboard, upon which the pattern of lace was printed. A few rows of pins and bobbins, from a dozen to 120, according to the width and figure of the pattern, completed the outfit needed by each individual engaged in the work.^ The returns of the marshals in the autumn of 18 10 indicated that this feminine industry was still carried on in some of the New England homes. "i In concluding this section brief mention will be made of carpet-making in the home, an industry appearing rather late, but remaining for some time after it did arrive. ' Register of Arts, p. 295. ' Hamilton Papers (1790-91), No. 1616. ^Ibid. Qoseph Dana's report). * Coxe, "Digest of Manufactures," op. cit., p. 736. 2i6 Household Manufactures in the United States Throughout the colonial period carpets were rather uncom- mon ever3rwhere. They were also slow in appearing in the frontier settlements. Those made in the colonies prior to 1776 were chiefly of rags. They were woven with a stout yarn warp and a woof composed of strips cut from the cast-off clothing of the people. At first the yarn for the warp was homespun; later it was purchased in the form of carpet chain from the merchants or peddlers. Since carpets were woven entirely by hand, even in the factories, up to 1845,' they remained somewhat of a luxury prior to this date. In the meantime, however, it ^as possible for those who desired to do so to weave them on the ordinary loom which many families kept for weaving common cloth. After this loom went out of general use, carpets for a neighborhood were woven by some member of the community. It was in this form that the business remained in a few homes long after the people in general had substituted factory- for home-made wearing apparel and the major portion of the household textile supplies. HOUSEHOLD IMPLEMENTS, UTENSILS, FURNITURE, NECESSITIES, AND COMFORTS While the home manufacture of the articles included in this portion of the discussion did not continue so long as those considered in the foregoing section, yet all of them were important products of the home factory at some time or other, and in some locality or other, during the entire period covered in this treatise. Practically all of the implements connected with the fabrication of linen, woolen, ' Bolles, op. cit., p. 394. The Products of the Family Factory 217 and cotton cloth were occasionally made in the homes. The same was true of such common utensils as brooms, brushes, all kinds of table furniture, cooper and earthen wares, as well as such necessities and comforts as hominy, meal, maple S3n:up and sugar, candles, soap, cider, beer, and whiskey. It is with products such as these that this section deals. The chief implements used in the manufacture of the various kinds of cloth were looms, little foot-wheels for spirming linen, large wheels and wheel heads for wool and cotton, and reels, quill winders, spools, warping-bars, reeds, shifts, harness, flax brakes, swingling blocks and knives, hatchels, cards, combs, and shuttles. All these were occasionally made in the home. Most any ordinary carpenter could make looms. Concerning his father, Doddridge remarked, "After making his loom, he often used it as a weaver.'" It often happened that someone in the community would devote himself entirely to the business of making them, thus relieving the farmer of the work.^ The making of spinning-wheels likewise soon became a specialty in any given community. They were peddled through the country by the makers. The foot- wheel usually sold at about two dollars, and the great wheel, the clock reel, and quiU wheel at one dollar each.' In the absence of these peddlers on the frontier, it was often very difficult to secure the wheels. Joseph True, one of the pioneers of Dover Township, Ohio, in 1803, walked forty miles to Zanesville, carr3Tng a few bear and ^Op. cit., p. 114. ^ Wayland, op. cit., p. 385. ^ Smith, op. cit., p. 75. 2i8 Household Manufactures in the United States deer skins, and purchased a wheel with the proceeds, bringing it home on his back, having made the round trip in two days/ To obviate the many difficulties connected with the making of cards and combs and at the same time to meet the great demand for them, machinery for cutting the wire teeth and piercing the leather backs Was perfected and brought into general use about 1789. Before this date cards were laboriously made at home by many persons. The wire for the teeth was secured at the nearest store.^ Even after the invention of machinery for cutting the teeth and piercing the backs, the women and children spent many hours around the open fire setting the wire teeth in the leather backs.^ Reeds, shuttles, small looms, swingling blocks and knives, flax brakes, and other implements used in making cloth in the home were made by the husbands or sons with little difficulty, if no one in the community chose to make them. The smaller looms, like the belt-loom, the tape-loom, the braid-loom, and the garter-loom, were rather simple implements and easily constructed at home. Until a mill for grinding grain was set up in a neigh- borhood, the people were obliged to make their own hominy and meal. The length of time that these primitive operations had to be kept up depended upon many factors. If a rather large number of people settled simultaneously in a place, a mill for grinding grain would be set up very soon after the settlement was established; while, on the ' Walker, Hist. 0/ Athens Co., Ohio, II, 469. a Bagnall, op. cil., I, iS4- ^ Earle, op. cit., p. 205. The Products of the Family Factory 219 other hand, if one persisted in living on the extreme frontier some distance from a community group, he would either have to go some thirty or forty miles to the nearest mill, or grate, crush, or grind his corn at home. As a matter of fact, the pioneer", even when a mill was set up within his reach, was forced to keep the primitive imple- ments for making meal in his home for fear of some accident to the mill or his inability to get to it in certain seasons/ The implements used in the home manufacture of meal and hominy were the grater, the hominy block, and the handmill. All these were made in the home and were in constant use in frontier communities. Since they have been so admirably described by one who really made them, it seems most appropriate to quote his description in full. It runs as follows: The hominy block and hand mill were in use in most of our houses. The first was made of a large block of wood about three feet long, with an excavation burned in one end, wide at the top and narrow at the bottom, so that the action of the pestle on the bottom threw the com up on the sides toward the top of it, from whence it continually fell down into the center. In consequence of this movement the whole mass of grain was pretty equally subjected to the stroke of the pestle. In the fall of the year, while the Indian corn was soft, the block and pestle did very well for making meal for johnny cake and mush, but were rather slow when the corn became hard. The sweep was sometimes used to lessen the toil of pounding grain for meal. This was a pole of some springy elastic wood, thirty feet long or more; the butt end was placed vmder the side of the house, or a large stump; this pole was supported by two forks, placed about one-third its length from the butt and so as to elevate " Drake, op. cit., p. $8. 220 Household Manufactures in the United States the small end about fifteen feet from the gromid ; to this was attached, by a large mortise, a piece of a sapling about five or six inches in diameter and eight or ten feet long. The lower end of this was shaped so as to answer for a pestle. A pin of wood was put through it at a proper height, so that two persons could work the sweep at once. This simple machine very much lessened the labor, and expedited the work. I remember that when a boy I put up an excellent sweep at my father's. It was made of a sugar tree sapling. It was kept going almost constantly from morning till night by our neighbors for several weeks. A machine, still more simple than the mortar and pestle, was used for making meal while the corn was too soft to be beaten. It was called a grater. This was a half -circular piece of tin, perforated with a punch from the concave side, and nailed by its edge to a block of wood. The ears of corn were rubbed on the rough edges of the holes, while the meal fell through them to the board or block to which the grater was nailed, which being in a slanting direction, discharged the meal into a cloth, or bowl placed for its reception. This to be sure was a slow way of making meal; but necessity has no law. The hand null was better than the mortar or grater. It was made of two circular stones, the lowest of which was called the bed stone, the upper one the runner. These were placed in a hoop, with a spout for discharging the meal. A staff was let into a hole in the upper surface of the runner, near the outer edge, and its upper end through a hole in a board fastened to a joist above, so that two persons could be employed in turning the mill at the same time. The grain was put into the opening in the runner by hand.' The conditions described above were quite common in practically all sections of the country in certain periods of their history. The early settlers were glad to copy the Indian way of making meal by crushing the grain with a hand pestle in a mortar made of a hollow stump. The ' Doddridge, op. cit., pp. iii ff. The Prodiicts of the Family Factory 221 sweep that Doddridge describes was the invention of the white man to lessen the labor of crushing the grain. Yet this was only a makeshift until a better way could be found. This came first in the form of the handmill, then the horsemill, then the windmill, and finally the gristmill, run at first by water power and later by steam. However, with all of these inventions, except the last, it was necessary to keep some of the primitive instruments around, because the streams would sometimes go dry or the wind would fail to blow.^ The common household utensils of home manufacture were brooms, brushes, wooden trays, trenchers, bowls, platters, noggins, lamps, buckets, dyetubs, churns, firkins, doormats, baskets, wooden breadtroughs, cheese-ladders, cheese-hoops, butter-paddles, washboards, and similar serviceable articles used by all housekeepers. The art of manufacturing many of these was learned from the Indians. The making of brooms and brushes lingered longer in any one section than many of the others. Even in New England the Indian or peeled brooms continued in common use until about 1820.^ The winter evening's work of many farmers throughout the country was the making of brooms. In New England they were made principally of birch and ash; in other parts of the country hickory answered the purpose as well. To make an ordinary Indian or splint broom a birch or ' Other references besides Doddridge on this subject are Cartmell, Hist, of Frederick Co., Va., chap, xiii; Belles, op. cit., p. 352; Drake, op. cit., pp. 57 f.; Parker, "Pioneer Life," op. cit., pp. 128 ff.; Callahan, Hist. ofW. Va., p. si; Levering, op. cit., p. 69. ' Temple, Hist, of Whately, Mass., p. 177. 222 Household Manufactures in the United States other tree, about five inches in diameter where it was cut off, was used. A stick about six feet long was cut from this tree. Twelve or fourteen inches from the big end of the stick a ring was cut and the bark removed from this end. The maker then began to sliver with a sharp jackknife little flat slivers up to the ring. This was continued until the heart was reached, or until the wood was too brittle to sliver or strip. After the brittle part was cut off, the slivers were tied down with a tow string. When all this was done, there only remained to whittle off the part above to the size of a handle. Besides this tj^e of broom, there were the parlor, oven, scrub, and hemlock brooms. The first was made of bristles; the second, of husks; and the third, like the Indian or splint broom, except with a shorter handle. The last was simply a bunch of "full-foliaged hemlock branches tied tightly together and wound around with hempen twine," into which a handle was driven. All these were kept on sale at most of the stores, the ordinary Indian brooms selling during the colonial times in Massachusetts for M. or gd. each. They were also peddled throughout the country by Indian squaws, who were glad to exchange them for cider and other articles.' But brief note need be made of the making of the rfemainder of the utensils in common use in the home. Trenchers and bowls were hewn from sections of maple or other kinds of logs and burned or scraped smooth; ' On broom-making, see Judd, op. cit., p. 368, note; Temple, op. cit., p. 177; Drake, op. cit., p. 94; Earle, op. cit., p. 302; Bigelow, Hist, of Cohasset, Mass., p. 235. The Products of the Family Factory 223 crude pots and lamps were made of clay, the latter in the form of cups;' and noggins were either hollowed out of the knots of trees or made of small staves and hoops.^ Cheese-ladders, cheese-hoops, butter-paddles, and many parts of the churn-presses were whittled out of red cherry or similar timber by the boys. Much ingenuity was often displayed in making many of these articles. Concerning his father's sldll along these lines Doddridge said: "His cooper- ware was made by himself. I have seen him make a small neat kind of woodenware called set work, in which the staves were all attached to the bottom of the vessel by means of a groove cut in them by a strong claspknife and a small chisel before a single hoop was put on."* The sailors, in their many hours of leisure which their long cruises afforded them, often executed cooperwise, with much neatness and elegance, a variety of little bowls and other utensils which they presented to their wives, children, or sweethearts upon their return.'' Until the cabinetmaker permanently estabhshed him- self in a town or settlement, much or even all of the furniture had to be made by members of the household. This was especially true in pioneer settlements and even older communities devoid of transportation facilities, since furniture was too cumbersome to move any great distance. In such communities tables, cupboards, benches, chairs, bedsteads, cradles, and in fact every piece of rude furniture ' Levering, op. cit., p. 6g; and Parker, "Pioneer Life," op. cit., UI, 130. " Roosevelt, op. cit., 11, 100. ^Op. cit., p. 114. iCrSveccEur, Letters from an Am. Farmer (Philadelphia, 1793), p. 152. 224 Household Manufactures in the United States in the household were homemade. We learn how some of these articles were devised on the frontier from the following description of the making of bedsteads, given by Duncan in his Old Settlers' Papers: For bedsteads, an oak tree that would split well was selected, cut down, and a log about eight feet long taken from the butt and split into such pieces as could be readily shaped into posts and rails. Another log not so long was split into such pieces as, with a slight dressing, made slats. Holes were bored with a tolerably large auger in suitable places in the posts for inserting the rails; two rails were used for each side and about three for each end, the end rails answer- ing for head and foot boards. Like auger holes were made in the lower side rails at suitable points for inserting the slats. When properly prepared this bedstead was put together by pressing the rails and slats in the holes prepared for each, thus making a rough but strong high-post bedstead, the posts at the top being tightly held together by rods prepared for the purpose, upon which curtains were to be hung. Thus was created a bedstead.' According to the same writer, tables were made in the maimer described as follows: A large tree was cut down, and a log, the length desired for the table, was cut off and split into pieces (slabs) as thin as possible. These slabs were generally two feet in width and six feet in length; when dressed and made as thin and smooth as possible, two were put together with strong cross pieces, tightly pinned with wood pins, the whole set upon four strong legs, thus making a strong but rough table four feet in width and six feet in length, the size of the table being governed by the size of the family." ' Op. cit., p. 398. See also Atkinson, Hist, of Kanawha Co., Va., p. loi, for a description of primitive furniture. ' Duncan, op. cit., pp. 399 f. The Products of the Family Factory 225 Three-legged stools were constructed in the same way as tables/ Cradles were made of poplar troughs and peeled hickory bark.^ It should be said that as the frontier life became more and more settled the furniture became less and less crude, and finally, when the settlement was sufficiently large to support a cabinetmaker, the industry passed largely into his hands, when remarkably artistic and durable articles were supplied to his customers in exchange for such commodities as food and clothing. Certain household necessities and comforts were reg- ularly made at home by members of the family. Among these were articles of food, drink, light, and general house- hold supplies. The first included hominy, meal, maple syrup and sugar, and cheese; the second, beer, cider, whiskey, and more than two score of other drinks; the third, candlewood and candles of various kinds; and the last, chiefly soft soap and potash. Because of the impor- tance of all these in the daily life of the people, a brief account of the processes involved in their manufacture follows. Since the making of hominy and meal in the home has been sufficiently considered in a preceding paragraph, the discussion may pass directly to the manufacture of maple s3Tup and sugar, which was one of the most extensive of all family industries. The business was carried on quite extensively as household labor in New England, the middle states, and sections of the South and West until about 1830, 'Durrett, "How the Pioneer Lived," FUson Club Pubs., No. 7, P- 43- " Roosevelt, op. cit., I, 120; and Levering, op. cit., p. 69. 226 Household Manufactures in the United States largely because substitutes for these articles were expensive and consequently could not be secured when desired. It was a matter of great economy when with a few weeks' work in the spring enough syrup and sugar could be supplied for a year's store and often a surplus for a ready market. Indeed, some felt about 1791 that the entire country could be supplied from this source. Dr. Benjamin Rush esti- mated at this date that, allowing three persons capable of labor to a family, each person attending to 150 trees, each tree yielding five pounds of sugar in a season, 60,000 families living in the sugar-maple districts would produce 135,000,000 pounds annually. He further estimated that on the basis of 600,000 families in the United States at the taking of the first census, and 200 pounds to a family, a total of 120,000,000 pounds would be sufiicient for the entire country, leaving 15,000,000 pounds for exportation.' While no dream like this ever came true, yet a very great deal of syrup and sugar was made in various sections of the country, both for home consumption and for sale. Two-thirds of the families in Vermont were engaged in the business of making maple sugar in 1794. Much was sold to shopkeepers. It was common for a family to make 200 or 300 pounds in three weeks. Large trees yielded five gallons of sap a day and from twelve to fifteen pounds of sugar in a season. In the town of Cavendish, in the spring of 1794, eighty-three families made 80,000 pounds.^ Similar conditions existed in other states. Great quantities were made in the outer districts of New ' Essays, Literary, Moral, and Philosophical, p. 287. ' Williams, op. cit., pp. 318 f. The Products of the Family Factory 227 Hampshire as early as 1784.' New Jersey, in 1789, was giving considerable attention to maple-sugar making.^ It was an important business in the western country before 1790.' The vicinity of Asylum, Pennsylvania, produced great quantities in 1796.^ It was said of Genesee County, New York, in 1803, that "maple sugar is manu- factured in such quantities that some of the inhabitants make from five hundred to upwards of a thousand pounds of it in a season."' The census of manufactures taken in the autumn of 1810 indicated that much maple sugar was annually made in the homes. Five counties in Vermont returned 352,532 potmds; twenty-two in Pennsylvania, 1,046,268; fifty-four in Kentucky, 2,471,647; and eight in Ohio, 667,660. The total amount in Ohio was esti- mated by the marshals at 3,023,806 pounds.* The sugar-making season was a busy one for all members of the household. Fortunately it came at a time when there was little farm work to do, thus making it possible for the male portion of the family to assist in the work. Baily's description of the season as he saw it in 1796 in western Pennsylvania and southern Ohio shows how it employed every member of a family. ' "Belknap Papers," in Mass. Hist. Soc. Colls., sth ser., Ill, 181. = "Letters of Phineas Bond," Am. Hist. Ass'n Rept., 1896, 1, 652. 3 Imlay, Topographical Description of the Western Country (3d ed., 1797), P- 61. < Weld and Liancourt, Travels in U.S. of N.A. (London, 1801), p. 153. s Munro, "A Description of Genesee County, in the State of New York," Doc. Hist, of N.Y., II, 1174- 'Coxe, "Digest of Manufactures," op. cit., pp. 731, 762, 789, 797. 228 Household Manufactures in the United States The season of sugar-making is a very busy time in those parts where trees are plenty; it furnishes employment for every branch of a family; and that, happily, at a season when they are not other- wise employed on their plantations. It employs them night and day; for in the day they are busily employed in collecting the sap as it runs from the trees, and during the greater part of the night in boiling this sap down to its proper consistency. The children are equally useful in this oflSce with the men; for whilst the latter are doing the laborious part of the undertaking, the children are employed in graining the sugar and watching the kettle.' Cheese-making long remained a household industry throughout many sections of the country. Besides its value as food, cheese utilized a large supply of milk that otherwise would have been cast aside. With a few rude utensils and a little care ten gallons of milk could be made into cheese in a short time. How this was done has been described or rather related as follows : Pour about ten gallons of nulk into a cheese tub. Pour into the milk a pint of liquid from a calf's rennet which has been soaking in a bowl. In about half an hour this acid turns the milk into curd floating upon whey. Cut the curd into small square blocks by running a wooden sword through it repeatedly. Spread a cheese cloth over the tub, pressing it down upon the curds so that they will flow up through the cloth. Then empty the remaining curd into a basket lined with a sheet of cheese cloth so that the rest of the whey shall drain off into a tub underneath the basket. Turn the corners of the cloth over upon the curd and put on stones to press all day. The dry curd is then to be salted to taste, and if sage cheese is to be made, some sage leaves and corn leaves to color it and to give flavor are mashed and soaked until enough liquid is ' Journal of a Tour, I7g6 and 1797, p. 182. For sugar-making in Kentucky, see Drake, op. cit., p. 86; and for an excellent general article on the same subject, Am. Museum, VI, 98 £E. and 209 S. The Products of the Family Factory 229 obtained to mix into the curd. Then for the press! A stout frame with pulleys on each side is used to press down the curd into a wooden cylinder, squeezing out the piece until it can be made no harder. After several days of continuous pressure the cheese is taken out of its hoop. The cheese is done and needs only time to ripen and strengthen it.' Cider was the only drink of any consequence that was made in the household way for any considerable time. While beer was brewed and whiskey distilled in private homes, yet their manufacture passed quite early in any given community into the hands of professionals. As early as 1649 there were six public brew-houses in Virginia.^ In the western country distilleries made their appearance soon after the farmers had raised a crop of corn and rye.^ While it is true that many families in New England had beer apparatus with which they brewed their common beverage,"* and that the planters of Virginia often "brewed their own beer, strong and good,"^ yet such conditions were temporary and passed away as public and private breweries were set up and orchards increased and came to maturity, from which a supply of cider could be secured. Cider, cider-brandy, cider-wine, and water-cider were for many generations the common beverage of the people of New England as well as many of those in other sections 'A description by Robert T. Burbank; quoted by Bigelow, op. cit., p. 232. ^ "A Perfect Description of Virginia," Force, Tracts, II, No. 8, p. 3. 'Hunter, "The Pathfinders of Jefferson Co., Ohio," Ohio Arch, and Hist. Soc. Ptibs., VI, 232. * Felt, Hist, of Ipswich, Essex, and Hamilton, Mass., p. 27. s "A Perfect Description of Virginia," op. cit. 230 Household Manufactures in the United States of the country. Well-to-do farmers put away from twenty to seventy barrels of cider in the cellar each year to drink. It was on the table three times a day. The farmer com- monly took a jug of it into the field in the fore- and after- noons and into the woods for drink in winter.' Until a cider-mill was set up in a town or community, the cider for the family's use was made in the home, by a very crude process at first, but later by one more elaborate. A log hollowed out to hold three or four barrels and a maul hung upon a spring pole for a press were the essentials of the first crude cider-mills.'' These, however, were soon supplanted by regular homemade ones, somewhat more serviceable and expedient, but on the whole almost as crude. Fortunately, a careful description of an old New England cider-mill has been preserved in the words of one who when a boy "scraped the nuts" of his father's mill many a day during the cider-making season. His description follows: These mills were very rude affairs. They consisted of two cuts of hardwood logs about twenty-two inches in diameter, and about two feet long, set upright and made to revolve, or roll against each other, cavities being morticed into one, and projections which they called "nuts" being set in the other to fit these cavities, and draw in the apples. The apples were poured into a "hopper" so arranged that their weight would press them against the revolving surfaces. From the top of one of these vertical rollers, extended a wooden crank twenty feet long, ten inches square at the wheel and tapering ' Cochrane and Wood, Mist, of Franceston, N.H., pp. 364 f .; also Brown, op. cit., p. 507. It was estimated in 1728 that a Boston family of nine persons of tie "middle figure" consumed in a year twelve barrels of beer, four barrels of cider, and six gallons of wine (Judd, op. cit., p. 372, note). » Blood, Hist, of Temple, N.H., p. 165. The Products of the Family Factory 231 to five, and so crooked as to reach nearly to the ground at the outer extremity. To this small end a horse was hitched and supplied the motive power by walking round and roimd in a circle. It required a man and two small boys to run the thing to an advantage. One small boy was to foUow the horse and keep him from stopping, and the other was to "scrape the nuts" while the man poured in the apples, bringing them a bushel at a time upon his shoulder, and dodging under the crank as it swept slowly around The process was slow, a cart load of apples going through in about three hours. Then the "trough" must stand over night, and then it [the pomace] was put into a press and the juice squeezed out. Afterwards it was cut up, soaked with water and pressed again. The last result was "water cider" and was considered strong enough for boys and women to drink.' Good substitutes for cider, cider-brandy, and cider- wine before the orchards matured in new settlements were "metheglin," maple-beer, and maple-wine. The first was made of steeped honeycomb and fermented honey and was very common on the frontier where wild honey was plentiful. It was preferred in the place of cider by some people.' Maple-beer and maple-wine were made in the home with little difficulty. To make the former, one mixed with about four gallons of boiling sap a quart of syrup. On cooling to blood heat enough yeast was added to cause fermentation and malt or bran to strengthen it. A little essence of spruce gave it a most excellent flavor. Maple-wine was made by boiling four or five gallons of sap down to make one, to which yeast was added in pro- portion to the quantity made. After fermentation had ■ Cochrane and Wood, op. cit., p. 364; also Donovan and Woodward, op. cit., pp. 476 f. ' Anderson, Counties of Warren, Benton, Jasper, Ind., p. 444. 232 Household Manufactures in the United States taken place it was set aside in a cool place for two or three years, when it became pleasant and sweet. Good vinegar was made by simply leaving the sap in the sun for a short time/ Supplying material to light the home was largely an individual household problem, not only during the colonial period, but even throughout the eighteenth century, and in some sections of the country far into the nineteenth. Before the advent of tallow candles into a neighborhood various materials were used. Candles were made from the tallow of the berries of the bayberry bush found in all the colonies and from whale oil and from honeycomb wax. Other materials much used were candle-wood found in all the colonies; rushes, after the bark had been removed and dipped into tallow or grease; and fish, bear, whale, and moose oil. All these did good service when there were no tallow or other candles, or to save the precious home- made ones carefully packed away in candle-boxes.^ Candle-wood, bayberry, and tallow candles were the chief sources for light in the homes prior to the appearance of kerosene in the first half of the nineteenth century. Since candle-wood was nothing more than the knots and hearts of the resinous pine trees, it requires no description; but, owing to their vast importance, a brief account of the making of bayberry and tallow candles seems apropos here. Such an account of the bayberries and the process ' Am. Museum, IV, 350. ^ Anburey, Travels through the Interior of Am., II, 269; Felt, op. cit., p. 26; Weeden, Early R.I., p. 100; Wells and Wells, Hist, of Hatfield, Mass., p. 14s; Judd, op. cit., p. 302. The Products of the Family Factory 233 of extracting the fat from them for tallow has come down to us from the pen of the Swedish naturalist, Peter Kalm, who came to America in 1748 and wrote of what he saw. His description follows: There is a plant here, from the berries of which they make a kind of wax or tallow, and for that reason the Swedes call it Tallow- schrub. The English call the same tree the Candle-berry-tree or Bayberry-bush; .... It grows abundantly in wet soil, and seems to thrive particularly well in the neighborhood of the sea The berries grow abundantly on the female schrub, and look as if flour had been strewed upon them. They are gathered late in autumn, being ripe about that time, and are then thrown into a kettle or pot full of boiling water; by this means their fat melts out, floats at the top of the water, and may be skimmed off into a vessel; with the skimming they go on until there is no tallow left. The taUow, as soon as it is congealed, looks like common tallow or wax, but has a dirty green color; it is for that reason melted over again, and refined; by which means it acquires a fine and pretty trans- parent green color. This tallow is dearer than common tallow, but cheaper than wax. Candles of this kind do not easily bend, nor melt in summer as common candles do; they burn better and slower, nor do they cause any smoke, but yield rather an agree- able smell when they are extinguished In Carolina, they not only make candles out of the wax of the berries, but likewise sealing-wax.' Since the farmers killed their beeves on the farm, they usually had a supply of material to make tallow candles. When enough of the carefully saved tallow had been accumulated, it was placed in a large kettle and melted to make candles, most of which in the early days were "dips." In time, however, molds became common. 3 Travels into N. A. (2d ed., 1772), I, 150. 234 Household Manufactures in the United States Some families owned them, others depended upon itinerant candle-makers. The process of making dipped candles was rather laborious. It has been described by one writer as follows: AVhen enough [tallow] had been accumulated it was placed in a large kettle and melted. The candle wicking was made of cotton, and was bought.' It came in balls. The wicking was cut twice the length of the candle and doubled over a stick made for the purpose and then twisted together. These sticks were two feet in length and an inch in diameter. Six wicks were placed upon each stick, and as many used as would hold all the candles to be made at one time. Two sticks, six or eight feet in length, often old rake handles, were used for support. These were placed upon two chairs about eighteen inches apart. On these the sticks were placed with the wicks hanging down. By taking a couple of the sticks in the hand the wicks were placed in the hot tallow until they were soaked. When all had been thus treated dipping began. Each time a little tallow adhered, which was allowed to cool. Care was taken not to allow them to remain in the hot taUow long enough to melt off what had already cooled. While the dipping was going on candles were suspended where a draft of air would pass over and cause them to cool quickly. Care was taken not to have the candles touch each other. The dipping continued until the candles were large enough for use. If the tallow in the kettle became too cool to work well, some boiling water was put in the kettle which went to the bottom and kept the tallow above warm enough to work." In a country where money was scarce and transporta- tion facilities meager, it was necessary for the inhabitants ' It was also made in the home of loosely spun hemp or from tow and from the silk down of milkweeds which grew in the fields (Earle, op. cit., P- iS)- ' Brown, op. cit., pp. 507 ,f.; also Bigelow, op. cit., p. 234. The Products of the Family Factory 235 to seek a product that would bear the expense of trans- portation to a market some distance from where it was produced. Such was found in the salts of lye, or black salts. The manufacture of these was one of the m!ain sources of income among the early settlers from New England to Ohio. To secure the lye from which to make them, ashes were collected from the clearings, saved from the wood burned in the dwellings and from log heaps made and burned especially for this purpose. While this last method was wasteful, yet necessity often forced it upon the frontiersman. After the ashes were collected, they were placed either in rude conical boxes, made of staves and flaring at the top, in leaches constructed of hollow logs, or in what was known as a mesh tub or ashhopper, made much like the conical boxes. When water was poured in at the top of any of these receptacles, the lye would leach through into a kettle or some similar vessel. If salts were to be made, it was boiled until evaporation left the matter held in the solution in soluble form. In this form it was usually sold to persons who made a business of converting it into potash; or the farmer himself might finish the process, which consisted of placing the salts in a kettle, subjecting them to red heat for one or two hours, when most of the combustible matter was consumed. The residuum, when cold, was broken up, packed into tight casks, and sent to market. Sometimes the settlers bar- tered their ashes to traders for eight or ten cents a bushel instead of making salts themselves. These traders made them into potash, which they sent to the nearest refinery for sale. The black salts were sometimes sold for three 236 Household Manufactures in the United States or four dollars a hundred to those who made it a business of converting them into potash.' The lye from the ashes was also used for making soft soap, one of the commonest products of the home factory. It was a very simple matter to mix the old grease, which had accumulated during the year, with some lye, boil it until the mixture did not separate when cooled, and secure a product known as soft soap, the making of which was one of the spring chores in many country districts long after they had passed out of the frontier stage of their development. Many years after the manufacture of other household necessities and comforts had passed to the shop or factory, soap-making remained an important part of the spring work of the women.^ FARMING IMPLEMENTS, BUILDING MATERIALS, AND GENERAL SUPPLIES Since the making of the articles included in this section passed so quickly to handicraftsmen, no extended treat- ment of them seems necessary here. The fact must be kept in naind, however, that until the blacksmith, carpenter, harness-maker, and sawmill became permanently estab- lished in a community the farmers had to make their wagons, plows, harrows, pitchforks, hand rakes, flails, ' On the uses made of ashes by the early settlers, see Williams, Hist, of the Fire Lands, p. 44; Wadleigh and Worthen, Hist, of Sutton, N.H., I, 452; Lapham, Hist, of Bethel, Me., p. 388; Winterbotham, View of U.S., II, 118; Abbot, Hist, of Concord, N.H., II, 1064; Brown, op. cit., p. 509; Williams, op. cit., p. 318. ' Bigelow, op. cit., p. 233. The Products of the Family Factory 237 shovels, ox-yokes, sleds, ax handles, hoe handles, sc5rthe- snaths, single- and double-trees, horse traces, collars, hames, bridles, clips, clevises, laprings, lumber, shingles, and nails, as well as many other articles of less importance yet much used on the farm. All manner of makeshifts were necessary to supply these when it was impossible to secure them already made. For example, horse collars were made of corn husks; hames, of crooked roots; clips, clevises, and laprings, of hickory withes; ox-yokes, of bent hickory wood; traces and bridles, of twisted deer hide; and pitchforks, from forked bows or antler horns." Vehicles for transportation, harrows, and plows were in great demand in a country where the majority of the people made their living by agriculture. All these were often very crude, being made by the farmer himself prior to the advent of the blacksmith and the carpenter into the village or community. The first vehicles were nothing more than log boats and sleds, the former consisting of a forked tree shaped with the ax to slide over the ground; the latter much like the first, except that the forks of the triangle were longer and the main stem was left long enough to form a tongue to which the oxen were hitched.^ In communities where the sled was not so well adapted to the farmer's use wooden-wheel wagons took its place. These wagons were very common in many sections of the country, especially throughout the German settlements ' Scharf and Westcott, op. ciL, I, 136; Vogel, op. cit., p. 21; Wilkinson, Annals of la., 3d ser., VI, 452; Wheeler, "Inventors and Inventions of Cayuga Co., N.Y.," Cayuga Co. Hist. Colls., II, 103; Donovan and Wood- ward, op. cit., p. 465. ' Wheeler, op. cit., pp. 103 ff. 238 Household Manufactures in the United, States of Pennsylvania and elsewhere. The wheels, sawed from the trunks of trees, axles made from hickory or white oak, and a coupling pole to connect them, were the essentials of these crude but serviceable wagons.' If circumstances demanded it, the fanner made plows and harrows needed in his farming operations. These were made entirely of wood at first. In the course of time in any community it became possible to get iron teeth for the A-shaped harrow and iron for the point, share, and wing of the plow. As soon as the blacksmith and carpenter appeared, these implements were supplied by their joint labor, the former making the iron parts and the latter the wooden beam, handles, and moldboard of the plow and the beams of the harrow. The "bar share" plows were in general use on the frontier until about 1815, when they were replaced in the older communities by the "Carey" plow, which in turn was superseded in about 1835 by one known as the "Daniel Webster."^ Unless there was a sawmill very near, the farmer had to make all the lumber he used on his farm; and since these mills were slow to make their appearance in sparsely settled and out-of-the-way districts because of the diffi- culties connected with getting the lumber to market, the farmers in such districts often had to depend upon the "sawpit" for several years for their supply of lumber. This structure usually consisted of a platform and a pit, set in a hillside, where two men, one above and the other ' Schultz, First Settlements of the Germans in Md., p. 18. = Donovanand Woodward, o^.cj/., 46s; Vogel, 0^. ci/., p. 21; Stevens, Ind. Mag. Bist., X, 401. The Products of the Family Factory 239 below, were able to saw about one hundred feet of boards in a day when the logs were squared and brought to the pit. While sawmills made their appearance in the colonies before 1700, yet they could not always follow the sturdy frontiersmen into the new settlements; hence the " sawpit," as well as many other crude implements, remained practically as long as the frontier itself.^ Other building materials commonly made by the farmer and his sons were shingles of various lengths, wooden hinges, and doorlatches. Since there was a great demand for them in the West Indiefe, many of the New England farmers spent much of their spare time in making shingles for this market. In the new settlements everywhere during the first few years it was necessary to make all the shingles and boards needed to cover the dwellings and other build- ings. The shingles were often shaved after they were rived. A man could shave about 1,000 in a day. The wooden hinges and doorlatches were among the many products of the New England "jackknife" industries." Before and even after the invention of the nail-cutting machine in 1790 by Jacob Perkins' the manufacture of nails was one of the common household industries of New England, as well as of some other sections of the country. In 1789 Fisher Ames said in a speech which he made in Congress that it was quite common for the country people of Massachusetts to erect small forges in their chimney ' Judd, op. cit., p. 49; Temple, HJsi. of North Brookfield, Mass., p. 60; Stevens, op. cit., X, 402. ' Earle, op. cit., p. 318. aPerley, "The Manufacture of Nails in Essex Co., Mass.," Essex Antiquarian, II, 70. 240 Household Manufactures in the United States corners and in winter, and on evenings when little other work could be done, to make great quantities of nails.' Nehemiah Bennett, in his description of the town of Middleboro, Massachusetts, written in 1793, said: "Nail- ing, or the business of making nails, is carried on largely in winters by the farmers and young men, who have but little other business during that season of the year."^ The manufacture of nails was also one of the plantation industries in Virginia. Thomas Jefferson required about a dozen of his younger slaves to make nails. They made about a ton a month at a considerable profit.^ Besides nails tacks were also made in the household way in New England during the eighteenth century. A writer in the Furniture Trade Journal, speaking of this industry, said: In the queer-shaped, homely farm houses, or the little, con- tracted shops of certain New England villages, the industrious and frugal descendants of the Pilgrims toiled providently through the long winter months at beating into shape little nails which play so useful a part in modern industry. A small anvil served to beat the wire or strip of iron into shape and point it; a vise, worked by the foot, clutched it between jaws furnished with a gauge to regulate the length, leaving a certain portion projecting, which, when beaten flat by a hammer, formed the head. By this process a man might make, toilsomely, perhaps 2,000 tacks per day.* ' Annals of Cong., ist Cong., 1789-91, 1, 156 f. " Quoted by Swank, Hist. 0} the Manufacture of Iron in All Ages (2d ed., 1892), p. 133. 5 Ibid., p. 269. 4 Ibid., p. 134. Other references on nail- and tack-making are Coxe, View of the U.S., p. 269; Hayes, op. cit., p. 89; and Perley, "The Manu- facture of Nails in Essex County, Mass.," op. cit., II, 70. The Products of the Family Factory 241 The making of such useful articles as pitchforks, scythe-snaths, wooden shovels, flails, ax handles, hoe handles, hand rakes, sleds, single- and double-trees, gave the farmer little difficulty, since wood was the only material entering into their construction. After the manufacture of all other of these articles had long passed to the shop or factory, a farmer ax-handle maker was not unconmion in many communities. This individual would search the woods in the fall for the best hickory or other suitable material from which he would supply the neighborhood with ax handles made during his leisure winter hours. Briefly summarizing the trend of the chapter as a whole, it should be said that, judged by both the quantity made and the length of time their manufacture remained in the home,, the relative importance of the three general classes of homemade products has been indicated by the space given to each division. Wearing apparel and household textile supplies were, during the entire existence of the family system of manufacturing, the most important and most generally produced articles. Of the articles included in the second section, maple syrup and sugar, cider, and soap were the ones that remained along with those in the first section when others had passed to the shop or factory. Most of the articles included in the last section were made by the farmer only in cases of sheer necessity. It was only on the plantations that they were regularly manu- factured for any considerable time. CHAPTER VII THE TRANSITION FROM FAMILY- TO SHOP- AND FACTORY-MADE GOODS The title of this chapter might well have been chosen as a fitting one for the entire discussion. Indeed, the history of household manufactures in the United States from 1640 to i860 is mainly concerned with that slow transfer from goods made entirely in the home by the members of a family and from materials largely grown on the farm to goods made wholly in shop or factory. This transfer was gradually going on during aU the years between the foregoing dates. Its story would be a simple one if it had been marked with uniformity either in time or in place. Since this was not the case, such a story becomes a very complex one. - While one section of the country was in one stage of the transfer, another section would be in quite a different stage, and another would have passed through it entirely, while still another had not begun it. The purpose of this chapter is to present in as clear and logical a manner as the data at hand warrant the history of this complex problem from its beginning to about 1830. It will be unnecessary to go into detail before 1810, since the preceding discussion has exhibited the status of the subject prior to this date. The general plan of procedure is, first, to give a brief statement of certain steps in and phases of the transition; secondly, to present a resume of its progress down to 18 10; and, thirdly, to 242 Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 243 portray the actual status of the family factory and the factors influencing the transfer, from 1810 to 1830, vmder the caption "The Transfer Completed, in Whole or in Part." STAGES IN, AND PHASES OF, THE TRANSITION The fact that the United States had a large frontier population during its entire history to i860 made the transfer from household- to shop- and factory-made goods something that was always taking place but never quite completed when the country as a whole is considered; so, for this reason, in discussing the stages in this transfer the fact that they were both geographical and temporal must be kept in miad. In general the older the community the more complete the transfer at any given date; but when adequate transportation facilities paralleled the establishment of a new settlement this general rule was violated. In this case shop- and factory-made goods were accessible from the outset, making the transfer an omitted phase of such a community's economic history. Nevertheless, in spite of the many exceptions to the general rule, especially when one considers individual homes and communities before transportation facilities preceded their establishment, there existed certain well-marked stages in the evolution of the simple household industry into the present-day highly organized and intricate factory system. The first stage in this evolution was what might be termed the family stage, in which household manufacturing was supreme. Practically all of the family's needs were supplied by its members. The producer and consumer 244 Household Manufactures in the United States were virtually identical. The family was the economic unit, and the whole system of production was based upon it. Before 1810 this stage was common throughout many sections of the country; after this date it became more or less localized. Closely related to the first stage was the second, the itinerant-supplementary stage, which involved either the hiring by the family of some outsider — a dressmaker, a tailor, a weaver, or shoemaker — to come in and perform a part of thfe work in the process of manufacturing or the sending of both raw materials and semi-finished products to regular establishments, the business of which was to supplement the household operations. The appearance of the foregoing itinerants along with fuUing-mills, carding-machines, dyeing and bleaching establishments, and tanneries in a community meant that the homes were sooner or later to be relieved of many of the operations relative to the making of a multitude of articles. Thus, as the years passed by, it became more and more common for the itinerant workmen to go their rounds each season, spinning the yarn from wool carded at the neighborhood machine, working up the cloth that had been fulled, pressed, and dyed at the fulling-mill and shop, or making up the leather tanned at the nearest tannery. The shop stage both followed and paralleled the itinerant-supplementary, following the itinerant phase and paralleling the supplementary. But few communities escaped some phase of this stage. In fact, prior to 1840 few cared to escape it and fewer still desired to give it up after it had once been established therein. New Hamp- Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 245 shire, one of the oldest states in the Union, was still in this stage as late as 1832, at which date it was the rule for most of the manufacturing in the several towns for the supply of the immediate community to be done by handicraftsmen in permanently established shops. Occasionally work was sent out from the shops to families. Tanning, black- smithing, shoemaking, coopering, cabinetmaking, chaise- and wagon-making, hattiag, harness-making, tailoring, and fulling were all done in shops, the output being con- sumed by the inhabitants of the neighborhood. For example, in Lancaster in the year 183 1 shoes and boots to the value of $3,116 were made, all of which were sold to the local inhabitants.' These shops accepted for pay raw wool, hides, lard, feathers, pork, bacon, or in fact almost anything the farmers had to offer. Generally the shopkeeper owned his place of business and furnished the raw materials and tools as well as the labor. The varia- tions, however, were as numerous in this stage as in some of the preceding ones. Often a shop grew into a real manufactory. This was especially true in the line of textile manufactures. An ambitious weaver would furnish his place of business with several looms, for which the mothers and daughters of the neighborhood often spun yarn, either selling it outright or taking in exchange the finished product. Some of these so-called manufactories kept several women busy. In 1764 there was one in Philadelphia which employed 100 persons in both the spinning and the weaving operations. A company in New York during the year 1767 employed some 300 poor " Documents Relative to Manufactures in the U.S. (1832), I, 669. 246 Household Manufactures in the United States and needy persons; one in Philadelphia in 1775 employed 400 women, and a Rhode Island gentleman in 1777 was receiving work from 500 spinners.' These facts are cited to call attention to the multiple variations in the handicraft system and at the same time to show how e3,sy and natural, when the factory system finally came, was the transfer of the girls from the spinning and weav- ing operations done in their homes to the same work done in factories. The foregoing variations in the handicraft system foreshadowed another system or stage, namely, the mill- small-factory stage. The gristmills, flour-mills, sawmills^ cotton- and woolen-mills which became so common in the various sections of the country prior to i860 were the means through which the people were supplied with products once made in their homes. Com, wheat, sawlogs, raw cotton, and raw wool were brought to these mills and exchanged for the corresponding manufactured articles. The sail-duck factory established in Boston^ in 1788 or 1789 is an example of the small-factory phase of this stage; and the mills set up in the South just after the War of 1812 and those in the West between 1830 and i860 are good examples of the strictly mill phase. Between 1812 and 1830 northern mill-builders went into certain sections of the South and built many yarn-mills in which both cotton and woolen yarn were spun and given out to the settlers for raw materials or the finished products. At first these mills, often situated on a plantation, merely " Abbott, Women in Industry, p. 38. » Bishop, op. cit., I, 419. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 247 supplied the plantation and neighborhood demands. Later, however, they were able to enter the northern markets.^ The mill-small-factory stage was followed in any given community by the large factory, which was made possible by the invention of machinery. Along the line of textile manufactures this machinery was the carding- machine, the spinning-jenny, and the power-loom. Up to 18 13 the cotton-mills throughout the country were principally for spinning, the weaving being done elsewhere in handlooms. In this year the power-loom and all the operations for converting raw cotton into finished cloth were for the first time introduced into this country at Waltham, Massachusetts. It was soon seen after this successful application of power spirming- and weaving- machines to the manufacture of textiles that the household system of manufacturing could not long contend against the economy and efl&ciency of the factory system. Yet the transition was not so rapid as some supposed it would be. The first textile-mills had many ups and downs, especially after the close of the War of 1812. Springing up mushroom-like during this war, they met with disastrous reverses upon its close on account of the large influx of foreign goods. But after the hard times of 1819 had passed the factories regained their prestige, and by 1830 much of the family spinning and weaving, especially in the older sections of the country, had been transferred to them. The imprecedented growth in the number of factories during the twenty years following the War of 1812 was " Claik, "Manufactures," op. cit., V, 321. 248 Household Manufactures in the United States chiefly due to the factory and the power-loom taking the place of home manufacturing and the handloom. The growth between 1830 and i860 was due to the increase in population in the United States in both numbers and wealth. While the family system of manufacturing had by no means disappeared in the country at large in 1830, yet at the same time there were sections where it had ceased to be an important factor in the economic life and prosperity of the people. In such sections combers, spinners, and weavers as individuals, whether in homes or shops, by this date had become a part of the great monster, the mill machine. PROGRESS OF THE TRANSITION TO 181O The foregoing resume of the phases of, and the stages in, the evolution of simple household industry into the compUcated factory system furnishes an excellent back- ground upon which to throw the discussion in the remaining sections of this chapter. There is no thought of presenting in detail the history of the phases and stages mentioned above; for, as stated in the Introduction, each as it once existed in this country is worthy of a separate history. The discussion in the present section is concerned with showing, first, how certain operations connected with textile manufacturing in the home passed into regular estabhshments; secondly, the availability in any given community of certain supplies with which the home had little or nothing to do in their manufacture; thirdly, how the handicraft system gradually evolved through the "jack of all trades" into the itinerant weavers, shoemakers, Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 249 and tailors; and, finally, how the transition was accelerated by the system which was established to distribute the shop- and factory-made goods. All these were actualities before 1810 in many sections of the country, and it was through them that the greater part of whatever transi- tion took place during the period under consideration was effected. Their consideration follows in the order enumerated. Connected with the manufacture of wearing apparel and household textile supplies were certain operations diflScult to perform in the home. For this reason it was quite natural that they should be transferred to regular establishments rather early in a community's history. Fulling, pressing, shearing, dyeing, bleaching, and carding were operations which sooner or later the women and girls of a neighborhood turned over to professionals. Among the first to be professionalized was fulling, a phase of the manufacture of woolen cloth requiring appliances not convenient to have or easy to manipulate in the home. One of the first establishments set up in a New England town was the fuUing-mill. Rowley, Massachusetts, seems to have had one as early as 1643; others were established as the need for them arose. Watertown had one in 1662; Andover, in 1673; Salem and Ipswich, in 1675; Dedham, in 1681; Barnstable and Byfield, in 1687; Ballards, in 1689; New London and Sewall, in 1693; Stanford, in 1700; Guilford, in 1706; and Dorchester, in 1709.' As early as 1784 there were as many as 41 of these mills 'Nortli, "New England Wool Manufacture," N. Eng. States, I, 192; Weeden, Soc. and Econ. Hist, of N. Eng., I, 306. 250 Household Manufactures in the United States in New Jersey;' and in 1810 Maine reported 59; Massa- chusetts, 221; New Hampshire, 135; Vermont, 166; Rhode Island, 24; Connecticut, 218; New York, 427; New Jersey, 52; Pennsylvania, 213; Delaware, 8; Mary- land, 28; Virginia, 55; Ohio, 21; Kentucky, 33; North Carolina, 20; and Tennessee, 2 — a total of 1,682.^ While these figures by no means represent all the fulling-mills in the various states and territories at this date^ yet they do serve to show in some degree at least the prevalence of the demand for this one process in the manufacture of woolen cloth to be done outside the home; and, judging from the advertisements in the newspapers, one is led to conclude that even before 1810 the fulling business was no longer a monopoly, as it had been in some of the early New England towns, but had passed into the competitive stage, in the older communities at least. One such news- paper notice will illustrate the sort of a campaign carried on by the fullers to maintain their business. The following appeared in the November 24, 18 10, issue of The Western Citizen, published in Paris, Kentucky. Look Here! I^^ Call all you good wives that know how to spin To turn round your wheels we would have you begin The subscribers intend carrjdng on the, Fulling Business this season where they did last, where business wUl be done with neatness and dispatch. They will attend on the first day of each month Court to receive cloth, at Geo. Slaughter's Tavern in Paris opposite the court-house door, at Z. Moore's, Cynthiana, at Saml. Paston's Store, Winchester, and at Doct. Haydon's Shop in Mounts terling: ' Bishop, op. cit., I, 414. 'Am. State Papers, "Finance," II, 693. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 251 and on the zd Saturday in each month at John Rules m Millersburg; and on the 4th Saturday in each month, at Theo Mather's near Concord meeting house. Cloth left at any of the above mentioned places, with directions for us, will be punctually attended to and accoimted for. We hope from the general satisfaction we gave last season in dressing 319 pieces that we shall merit the Patronage of the People. Samuel J. Dawson and October 9th, 1810. John G. Campbuix. The fact that this firm dressed 319 pieces of woolen cloth in one season shows that the people were ready to transfer this operation to these mills. The owners would accept almost anything the farmers had to offer them in exchange for this work. The appearance of the carding-machine near the close of the eighteenth century was the forerimner of what finally came to be another important phase of the evolu^ tion of the textile manufactures away from the family household. At first the housewives were rather slow to patronize this important invention; but in due time they saw its utiHty and economy, since they could spin twice as much from a machine-carded roll as they could from a hand-carded one. The number of carding-machines in operation in 1810 evidences how enthusiastically the mothers and daughters accepted the innovation as soon as its usefulness had been demonstrated. The incomplete census returns for this year showed that in Maine there were 75 machines; in Massachusetts, 180; in New Hamp- shire, 109; in Vermont, 139; in Rhode Island, 23; in Connecticut, 184; in New York, 413; in New Jersey, 128; 252 Household Manufactures in the United States in Pennsylvania, 340; in Delaware, 11; in Maryland, 32; in Virginia, 96; in Ohio, 18; in Kentucky, 21; in South Carolina, 4; in Mississippi Territory, i; and in the District of Columbia, 2 — a total of 1,776.' These re- turns and those in a preceding paragraph relative to fulling-inills give some notion at least of the progress of the fulling and carding phases of the transition under consideration. The large number of both fuUing-mills and carding-machines in some of the older and more densely populated sections and the extremely small number in the newer and less densely populated ones demonstrate the fact that until the arrival of adequate transportation facilities the stage of the process in a community at any given time was determined largely by its age and the density of its population; the large number of mills in New York and Pennsylvania and the small number in Virginia and South Carolina and the West disclose this fact. In the course of time pressing, shearing, dyeing, and bleaching were done in connection with the processes of fuUing and carding, or in separate establishments. These businesses were as extensively advertised in the newspapers as the fuUing. The following, which appeared in the Tennessee Gazette and Mero District Advertiser, October 24, 1804, shows how the commxmity's attention was called to the work these establishments did. Blue, Red, Green, Black, and Yellow Dying. I will color cotton and linen thread, a deep blue, at four shillings and six pence per pound; and a light blue at two shillings and six pence per pound; * Am. State Papers, "Finance," II, 693. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 253 and the other colors mentioned I will dye upon woolen at 2 shillings per pornid, and wiU warrant them to stand equal to eny ever dyed in America, for I dye with warm dye. Adrian Magutre.' Maguire ran a weaving establishment also. In con- junction with the foregoing advertisement he notified the public that he was ready to furnish to anyone desiring them diaper carpets, double coverlids, and summer counter- panes. For pay he accepted cotton thread or woolen yarn, provided each was spun according to directions sent out by him. Furthermore, he not only promised to do dyeing and weaving, but also agreed to teach all who came how to spin cotton thread and woolen yarn. From this and many similar notices it seems that, in the more settled communities, it was customary to make the yarn and the thread in the homes and exchange them for the finished cloth at the shops of the weavers. These sup- plementary establishments were evidently patronized by the people, even though they were miles away from them. One Norton assured his customers in advertising his wool-carding business that the rolls would be so packed as to carry on horseback fifty miles.^ A^Tiile no statement can be made which would be true of the country at large in 1810, yet it seems to be a safe generalization to say that more cloth was fulled, dyed, and pressed in regular estab- lishments than outside of them, and that a very great deal of the wool was machine- and not hand-carded. It should also be said that the influence of the small factory, " Quoted by Phillips, Plantation and Frontier, II, 328. 'Ibid., p. 329. 254 Household Manufactures in the United States which had been in operation in certain sections of the country' for ahnost two decades before 1810, was being felt more and more as the demand for domestic manu- factures increased, owing to the threatened war with England. Paralleling the foregoing so-called supplementary opera- tions to the family factory was a kind of manufacturing which was carried on entirely independently of the home, namely, that done by the gristmills, flour-mills, and saw- mills. In all except the most recently established commu- nities, one or all of these mills had existed long before 1810. Their presence relieved the people of serious anxiety concerning some most important articles relative to their daily existence^ — ^articles which were gladly accepted to supplant what individual homes had supplied by means of the mortar and pestle, handmill, and sawpit before the advent of the foregoing conveniences into a community. If necessary, severe hardships were under- gone to secure the products of some of these mills, farmers often journeying twenty, thirty, or even forty miles to a gristmill and waiting days or even weeks for their turn.* However, such hardships were by no means endured iftdefinitely; for in due time after the beginning of a new settlement mills of various kinds were set up, a systematic account of the first and subsequent appearance of which in the various sections of the country is a story too long for this discussion. In fact, such a narrative would "Woodward, "Manufacturing Interests of Hartford," N. Eng. States, II, 815. " Drake, Pioneer Life in Ky., p. 60. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 255 throw little light on the transfer in question. It does seem necessary, however, to call attention to the early existence of the various kinds of mills in certain sections of the country in order to show the availability of their output. It is a well-known fact that mills for grinding grain were among the first conveniences set up by the colonists, since they wished to escape as soon as possible the task of making meal Indian-fashion one day for the next; so, very soon after the beginning of a new community some sort of a mill for grinding com into coarse meal was erected. This mill was either a handmill, a horsemill, a windmill, or a water-mill. In New England it was the custom for a town either to subsidize the mill or to assume the entire expense of its establishment. For example, at a town meeting in Hartford, Connecticut, April 6, 1657, the inhabitants decided to build a mill to grind their corn, the cost of erecting it to be borne by all.' The general custom, however, was to encourage some citizen to set up a sawmill or gristmill by granting him a monopoly on the business as well as land and other inducements.* Wallingford, Connecticut, is an example of the early consideration of this important matter by the people of a new community. This town was incorporated in 1670. At a town meeting on January 30, 1673, steps were taken which led to the ' Conn. Hist. Soc. Colls., XIV, 484. ^ Sheldon, Hikl. 0} Deerfield, I, 609. For an elaborate discussion of this subject, see Bishop, op. cit., I, chap. vi. The first and subsequent appearance of mills in each colony is discussed at some length in this chapter. 256 Household Manufactures in the United States construction of a mill to grind the com of the community. This mill was completed on December 12, 1674/ Horsemills, windmills, and water-mills were as common in the early history of the middle colonies as they were in New England, while quite the contrary was true in the region farther south. On account of the nature of the settlements and the presence of slaves and other servants the southern colonies did not establish such mills as early and as rapidly as did their northern neighbors, handmills serving instead. The presence of the handmill on a plantation made possible the profitable employment of slaves and indentured servants in seasons when other work was slack; and, furthermore, no toll was exacted for the grinding. Largely for these reasons it became necessary to subsidize the establishment of other kinds of mills in this region. Maryland, in 1669, passed a law to encour- age the setting up of water-mills. This law gave to every man who would set up such a mill twenty acres of land on either side of the stream and fixed the toll at one-eighth of a bushel of wheat and one-sixth of a bushel of com. However, few mills seem to have been built in this colony before 1760.^ According to Hugh Jones, Virginia was supplied with mills in 1724. In discussing this point he says: "As for grinding Corn etc. they have good Mills upon the Runs and Creeks."^ The reliance upon these ' Hubbard, "Manufacturing Interests of Wallingford," N. Eng. States, II, 940. = Tyson, "A Brief Account of the Settlement of Ellicott's Mills," Md. Hist. Soc. Pubs., I-VI, No. 4, pp. 31 f. 3 Present State of Va. (Sabin's Reprints, No. $, 1865), p. 53. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 257 neighborhood gristmills and flour-mills was by no means as absolute in the tide-water region before 1790 as it was in the region north of Maryland. The certainty of securing a supply from either their northern neighbors or from the handmiUs operated by servants or slaves on the plantations relieved the seaboard people of quite a bit of that anxiety concerning one important phase of their economic life, found among the northern colonies. The southern back-country and the trans-Alleghany settlements were supphed with both gristmills and saw- mills early in their history, the former usually appearing soon after the arrival of the first settlers,' who were always glad to exchange the old hominy block and wooden pestle for stone handmills, which in the course of time they exchanged for the water-propelled tubmill. Nor did the evolution stop here, for as soon as a settlement took on the appearance of permanence, the tubmills were super- seded by the water gristmills, which appeared in the trans- Alleghany country before the close of the eighteenth century. While the mill period proper did not begin in the Ohio Valley before 1810,^ yet at the same time there were many sawmills, gristmills, and flour-mills in this region before this date. Floating mills appeared on the Ohio River as early as 1796. Windmills and water-mills had appeared before this date.' The floating mills were more dependable ' See Cartmell, "Mills and Other Developments," Hist, of Frederick Co., Va., chap, xiii; also Callahan, Hist, of W. Va., p. 51. ' Lippincott, Hist, of Manufactures in the Ohio Valley to the Year i860, chap. iv. 5 Ellicott, Journal, p. 11. 258 Household Manufactures in the United States than either of the other two. They were of most service duriag the fall and summer, when the water in the river was low and there was not enough water for the water- mills along the shores/ A gristmill was in operation at Eaton's Station, one of the settlements on the Cumberland River near the present site of Nashville, Tennessee, as early as 1783.^ Other stations along the river were also supplied with mills quite early in their history. Horse and water gristmills as well as sawmills were in operation in Illinois before the close of the eighteenth century.' All these facts are briefly mentioned in this connection ' Hildreth gives the following description of one of these mills: "The mill was erected on two boats: one of them five, the other ten feet wide and forty-five feet long. The smaller one was made of the trunk of a large ■ hollow sycamore tree, and the larger, of timber and plank, like a flat boat. They were placed eight feet apart, and fastened firmly together by beams running across the boats. The smaller boat on the outside supported one end of the shaft of the water-wheel, and the larger boat the other, in which was placed the mill stones and running gear, covered with a tight frame building or mill house, for the protection of the grain and meal and the comfort of the miller. The space between the boats was covered with planks, forming a deck, fore and aft of the water wheel. It was turned by the natural current of water, and was put into motion, or checked, by puUing up or pushing down a set of boards, similar to a gate, in front of the wheel. It could grind from twenty-five to fifty bushels of grain in twenty-four hours, according to the strength of the current. The larger boat was fastened by a chain cable to an anchor made of timbers and filled with stones, and the smaller one by a grape vine to the same anchor. The mill was placed in a rapid portion of the Ohio, about the middle of Backus's island, a few rods from the shore, and in sight of the castle. The current here, was strong and the position safe from the Indians" — {Pioneer History, P- 376)- " Putnam, Hist, of Middle Venn., p. 177. ' Reynolds, My Own Times, p. 23. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 259 to make the point that among the first homemade products to be supplanted by mill- or factory-made goods were meal, flour, and lumber. In all sections of the country except the most recently settled regions and possibly some sections of the southern seaboard this transfer had taken place before 1810. There were indeed few sections of the country at this date that did not have access to the output of these mills. The fact that meal or flour could be secured in exchange for two of the commonest farm products placed these pioneer luxuries in the reach of all. While the gristmiUs, flour-mills, and sawmills were supplying the people of a neighborhood with meal, flour, and lumber, the handicraft system was providing them with a multitude of other necessities. This system evolved out of what has been denominated the itinerant- supplementary stage of the transfer under consideration. Before a shoemaker, a tailor, or a weaver could eke out a hving in a stationary shop it was often necessary for him to serve some time as an itinerant. At first he had to go to the houses of his customers and do his work there; later he supplemented his shop activities with occasional trips through the community, and finally it was possible for him to do all his work in his own shop. How this evolution actually took place may be seen by following one of its phases through. For example, the shoemaker at first went from house to house to make up the leather. Sometimes he farmed in the summer and did the shoe- making for the whole neighborhood in the winter. This "village cobbler," as he was commonly designated, gradually 26o Household Manufactures in the United States came to carry a little stock of leather and to exchange shoes with the farmers, tanners, and traders for leather, foreign goods, and foodstuffs. After a while this same cobbler employed many helpers and manufactured shoes for the shopkeepers in the town to keep in stock and to export to other towns. The system of barter which was so common made it possible for the neighborhood to receive its supply of shoes from either the shoeshop or store in exchange for all kinds of farm produce. The store would take the leather as willingly as the shoemaker, since it could be exchanged for more ready-made shoes at the shop of the shoemaker. Thus in a generation or so after its settlement, even though it were isolated from the rest of the world, a community could secure a supply of shoes made by professionals in regularly established shops. What came to pass in the shoe business happened in the weaving and tailoring businesses as well. In fact, the itinerant-supplementary system as it existed, especially in these three lines of endeavor, was the direct forerurmer of the handicraft system, the latter being the logical outcome of the former, and both being essential in the early development of communities devoid of the transportation facihties necessary to exchange the results of the farm labor for manufactured commodities brought from distant centers. The part that the handicraft system played in the economic history of this country down to 1810 and in some sections much later than this date would be difficult to overestimate. There is no idea of giving the system adequate treatment here, the purpose simply being Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 261 to show the part it played in the transfer herein con- sidered. The early appearance in a community of handicrafts- men and establishments to reheve the settlers of the arduous task of manufacturing the necessities of life within their homes is well illustrated in the history of Ipswich, Massachusetts. This town, according to Felt,' had carpenters in 1633; a tannery in 1634; a gunsmith and a gristmill in 1635; a currier in 1638; a basket-maker and a cooper in 1639; malt works in 1641; a weaver in 1647; aropemakerin 1648; salt works in 1652; a sawmill in 1656; a hempmill in 1657; a brewery in 1663; cord- wainers and glaziers in 1664; smiths in 1667; a fulling-mill in 1675; soapmakers in 1678; a brickyard in 1683; and a clothier in 1727. All these were considered beneficial accessories to a town and in many cases they were sub- sidized in order to make their existence both possible and permanent. Other New England towns settled during the seven- teenth and eighteenth centuries duphcated what Felt has recorded of Ipswich. The interior towns were almost entirely economically independent and had all the elements of prosperity within their own limits. The tanner tanned the hides and sent what leather the neighborhood did not use to Boston or some other coast town; the hatter sheared the lambs and made hats for the people and sent felt shapes for hats to market; the clothier carded the wool and dressed the cloth woven either by the professional weaver or by the women in their homes; the blacksmith ' Hisl. of Ipswich, Essex, and Hamilton, pp. 95 fE. 262 Household Manufactures in the United States made all manner of useful implements; and so on, with the remaining handicraftsmen. All these usually took farm produce in exchange for their wares, making it possible for a community to exist on a minimum amount of household manufacturing. The handicraft system flourished in the middle states as well as in New England. The following examples give an idea of its extensiveness in both the older and the newer sections in one of the states of this group. In the borough of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, in 1786, there were 234 manufacturers out of a total of 700 families. Among this number there were 14 hatters, 36 shoemakers, 4 tanners, 17 saddlers, 25 tailors, 25 weavers of woolen, cotton, and linen cloth, 3 stocking-weavers, 25 white- and blacksmiths, 6 wheelwrights, 11 coopers, 6 clockr and watchmakers, 6 tobacco and snuff manufacturers, 4 dyers, 7 gunsmiths, 5 ropemakers, 4 tinners, 2 brass founders, 3 skin-dressers, i brushmaker, 7 turners, 7 nail- makers, 5 silversmiths, 3 potters, 3 brewers, 3 copper- smiths, and 2 printers.^ While one has no records of the output of these worlanen, yet at the same time their very presence shows that the people had ample opportu- nities to provide themselves with what would seem to be a sufficient supply of most all the necessities of life. While the foregoing enumeration shows that one of the older communities in Pennsylvania had an abundance of handicraftsmen, yet at about the same time there were practically the same proportion of these desirable citizens to the whole population in the western portion of this » Coxe, View of the U.S., p. 313. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 263 state as in the older section. The distance from the coast towns and the lack of transportation facilities made it a safe venture for the professional workmen in the back- country districts. In the towns of Washington, Bedford, Pittsburgh, and Huntingdon in 1790 there were clock- makers and watchmakers, silversmiths, coopers, skin dressers, breeches-makers, tanners, curriers, tailors, cab- inetmakers, blacksmiths, shoemakers, hatters, dyers, weavers, reedmakers, saddlers, saddletree-makers, spin- ning-wheel makers, maltsters, brewers, tinners, wheel- wrights, stocking-weavers, gunsmiths, ropemakers, and whitesmiths. The total number of manufacturers in these towns in the order named above was 32, 15, 40, and 23. At the same date there were but 130 families in Pittsburgh, 40 in Bedford, and 85 in Huntingdon.' The people in the Northwest, in Kentucky, and in Tennessee were by no means deprived of the wares manu- factured in the shops of the handicraftsmen. Imlay, a commissioner for lajdng out land in this region, left, in a series of letters to a friend in England, an excellent de- scription of industrial conditions here between 1783 and 1790. He says: Linen and woollen cloths, leather, and hats for home consump- tion, are manufactured with considerable success. The first two articles are only made in families for their own use; but the latter are made by men of profession in that business, and are of a quality " Ibid., p. 311. On account of the nature of the tidewater settlements the handicraft system did not thrive here as it did in the region north of Maryland. Conditions in the back-country districts of the South were so similar to those in Pennsylvania that they need not be treated separately. 264 Household Manufactures in the United States that would not disgrace the mechanics of Europe. Blacksmiths' work of all sorts, even to making of firearms, is done there; as is also cabinet work, wheel-wright, mill-wright, house carpentry, joinery, shoe-making, etc., etc., in short, all trades immediately necessary to the promotion of the comforts of new settlements, are to be found there.' This statement is good evidence of what really happened wherever the population was suflSciently dense to support the tradesmen. It also shows that the weaving business was kept in the home after most of the others had been transferred to the shops. In other words, the transfer from family- to shop- and factory-made fabrics was the last to take place in this and the other sections of the country as well. One great problem in the transition, down to 1810 and for years after, for that matter, was the distribution of the shop- and factory-made products to the people in remote districts. There were of course stores established quite early in the history of any community.^ After the pur- chase of Louisiana many supplies came to the trans- Alleghany country by way of New Orleans on keelboats; previous to this event the region had been supplied by the great Pennsylvania wagons from Pittsburgh and the ports along the Ohio. In spite of these facts the stores were by no means able to reach all the people. Some scheme had to be devised to get the goods from the producer to the consumer, who was usually a willing customer provided ways and means of both exchange and distribution were ' Topographical Description oj the Western Territory (3d ed., 1797), p. 62. " Phelan, Hist, oj Tenn., p. 177. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 265 discovered. The handicraftsmen and the small-factory operators solved these two problems by establishing a system of peddling their wares through the country and at the same time accepting almost anything the people had to give in exchange for them. This was the beginning in this country of the huckster system which subse- quently became so general, and in fact has not been entirely abolished to this day. All manner of articles, from spinning-wheels to wooden cups, were peddled through the country, usually by the tradesmen themselves.' Quite an elaborate plan of huckster distribution was worked out by some manu- facturers. An example of one such scheme was the distribution of the output of the tinware industry at Berlin, New Hampshire. Dwight, in his Travels in New England and New York, gives an excellent description of this system as it existed in 1797 when he visited this town. He s^ys: For many years, after tinned plates were manufactured in this place [Berlin] into culinary vessels, the only method used by the pedlars for conveying them to distant towns, for sale, was by means of horse and two baskets, balanced on his back. After the war [Revolutionary], carts and wagons were used for this purpose, and have, from that time to the present, been the only means of con- veyance which have been adopted. The manner in which this ware is disposed of, puts to flight all calculations. A young man is furnished by the proprietor with a horse, and a cart covered with a box, containing as many tin vessels, as the horse can conveniently draw. This vehicle within a few years has, indeed, been frequently exchanged for a wagon; and then " Cogswell, Hist, of Henneker, N.H., p. 397. 266 Household ManufacPures in the United States the load is doubled. Thus prepared, he sets out on an expedition for the winter. A multitude of these young men direct themselves to the Southern States; and in their excursions travel wherever they can find settlements. Each of them walks, and rides, alter- nately, through this vast distance, till he reaches Richmond, New- bem, Charleston, or Savannah; and usually carries with him to the place of his destination no small part of the gain, which he has acquired upon the road. Here he finds one or more workmen, who have been sent forward to cooperate with him, furnished with a sufficient quantity of tinned plates to supply him with all the ware, which he can sell during the season. With this he wanders into the interiour country; calls at every door on his way; and with an address, and pertinacity, not easily resisted, compels no small number of the inhabitants to buy. At the commencement of summer they return to New- York; and thence to New-Haven, by water; after selling their vehicles and their horses Every inhabited part of the United States is visited by these men. I have seen them on the peninsula of Cape Cod, and in the neighbourhood of Lake Erie; distant from each other more than six hundred miles. They make their way to Detroit, four hundred miles farther; to Canada; to Kentucky; and if I mistake not, to New-Orleans and St. Louis.' By 1830 the business of these peddlers had extended to all sorts of merchandise. At first, pins, needles, scissors, combs, coat and vest buttons, trifling articles of hardware, children's books, and cotton stuffs, made in New England, were added to the tinware. Later, a number set out with large wagons loaded with dry goods, hats, boots, shoes, clocks, firearms, nails, and even furniture. Stores were also established in many of the interior towns throughout the South and West. As the stock of each peddler became exhausted, he repaired to these stores to replenish his ' Vol. II (1797), PP- 53 f- Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 267 supply. Great quantities of goods were thus sold by these hucksters during a season.' There seems to be no way to definitely determine the contribution of the foregoing system of distribution to the complete transfer to factory-made goods. Even in the face of this diflSculty, however, one must conclude that many families would certainly have waited much longer than they did for the wares the peddlers sold them had no such system been introduced. In the absence of other means of exchange, two things were made possible by this system, namely, the very existence of the factory itself and the opportunity for the farmer and his family to devote their spare time to pursuits other than those connected with household manufacturing. Thus in the course of time through the operations of the various agencies supplementing the manufacture of wearing apparel and household textile supplies in the home, from the output of the gristmills, flour-mills, and sawmills and the shops of the handicraftsmen, and by means of the scheme for distributing manufactured goods in con- junction with the barter system, many families were in a position to discontinue their manufacturing activities along all lines except the few operations which the fulling, dyeing, and carding establishment did not perform; and after 1790 it was even possible to discontinue much of the family spinning, for, with the establishment of spinning- mills came a supply of cotton thread and woolen yarn at a rate so low that the homes could no longer afford to spin them. ' Ibid., p. ss> note; Callender, Econ. Hist, of U.S., pp. 304 f., note. 268 Household Manufactures iti the United States THE TRANSFER COMPLETED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, 181O-30 Considering the country as a whole the transfer from home- to shop- and factory-made goods was rather generally completed before the close of the third decade of the nineteenth century. Even before this date wa)rs and means to supply the people in most sections of the country with all the necessities of life except clothing and household textile supplies had been pretty generally provided. The home manufacture of these last-named articles was some- what common for a number of years after 1830; for, until the factory S3rstem became firmly established, there was no escape from both spinning-wheels and looms for the women and girls of many sections of the coimtry. Indeed, they did not seem to care to escape them. Female indus- tries as old as spinning and weaving were not to be crowded out of their strongholds except by some powerful agency like the modern factory system. During the period under discussion there were many forces tending either to hasten or to retard the transition, chief among the former being the improvements in the means of trade and transportation, the rise of the factory system, and the opportunities for exchanging farm produce and household manufactures for shop and factory goods; retarding agencies were inventions to aid family manu- facturing, difficulties and restrictions thrown in the way of foreign trade and transportation following 1807, the War of 18 1 2, and the flooding of the country with foreign goods at the close of this war. An extended treatment of each of these factors does not seem necessary in this Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 269 connection. For the purpose of this discussion it will suffice simply to caU attention to their existence and to show how they affected the subject under consideration. Up to 18 1 5 the inhabitants of Kentucky, Tennessee, the Northwest Territory, western New York, and northern New England were in the same relation to the seaboard regions as the New England and middle colonies were to the mother-country during the colonial period. Just as the people north of Maryland in colonial times were without products to exchange for the commodities of England, so were the pioneers of the regions mentioned above without products to exchange for commodities to satisfy their daily needs. While it is true that their furs would stand the expense of carriage to the seaboard, and that they could drive a few cattle to the eastern markets, and float some grain and provisions down the rivers, yet at the same time the income from these sources barely furnished the necessities which they were totally unable to supply themselves. This was the supreme age of the handicraft system and home manufacturing in these regions. Communities became practically self-supporting. The handicraftsmen could live on the products of the farm which they received in exchange for the output of their shops. Few factory-made goods reached many of these people. What they were obliged to have came mostly from Boston, Philadelphia, New York, and Baltimore. The cost of transporting goods from these towns was almost prohibitive during the early history of these sections. In 1805 it cost $4 . 50 a hundred to get goods from Baltimore to Pittsburgh, and $5.00 a hundred from Philadelphia 270 Household Manufactures in the United States to the same place/ After the goods reached Pittsburgh they were sent down the Ohio to be distributed to merchants in the river towns. Even though the merchants did take farm produce for pay, the price of the goods from the East was so outrageous that few could afford to exchange even farm products for commodities which could be made in the home. The appearance of the steamboat on the western waters after 181 1 revolutionized the commerce of this region. While the canoes, pirogues, bateaux, barges, keelboats, flatboats, arks, and sailing vessels had done good service before this date, yet the problem of upstream navigation was not solved until the application of steam to river transportation, the influence of which on the economic history of the interior would be difl&cult to overestimate. The numerous rivers upon which steamboats could be used made it possible to reach almost every section of the coun- try settled before 1830. Even above the points of large steamboat navigation on the upper courses of the streams and their tributaries, small steamboats and keelboats were found; and a great deal of produce was floated down even out of the creeks on flatboats and canoes to the point of steamboat navigation. This sjrstem of natural water- way transportation made possible much of the transfer to factory-made goods that took place in the interior before 1830.^ ' Harris, Journal of a Tour into the Territory Northwest of the Allegheny Mountains, p. 42. " For an extended discussion of this interior commerce, see Gephart, Transportation and Industrial Development in the Middle West. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 271 The rapid extension of the factory system between 1790 and 1830 was largely responsible for the revolution which occurred during these decades in the factory manu- facture of cotton, woolen, and linen fabrics, the domestic production of which had lagged behind that of many other necessities. Outside of textiles a storekeeper as early as 1814 could stock his store almost wholly with articles manufactured in the United States,' the handicraftsmen, the factory, both small and large, supplying them. Because of this fact the discussion in the remainder of this chapter and all of the following one may be focused on the transfer of clothing and household textile supplies from those made, wholly or in part in the home to those made wholly within the factory. ' Proof of this statement is found in a list of articles in a store at Wil- mington, Delaware, in 1814, all of which were manufactured within the United States. Here is the list: "Andirons of brass and iron, shovels and tongs, brass and iron tops, bed-screws and wood screws of all descrip- tions; plane bitts and planes of all kinds; screw augers, hatchets and axes, tutania ladles and spoons, and iron ladles; box coflFee mills; bellows, brass and iron pipes; wagon boxes and hollow ware of all kinds; shovels and spades; mill, cross cut and frame saws; girth and straining webbing; spikes, nails, tacks and springs of all descriptions; whitened and brass knobs and coach makers ware generally, plated and plain; shoe knives, stirrup and bridle bitts, plated and plain; window glass of all kinds; white and red lead; litharge; spirits turpentine; linseed oil; Spanish brown and yellow ochre, ground and dry; painting brushes and other brushes generally; trace chains and other chains, shoe maker's hammers; carpenter's rules; brass candlesticks; patent lamps; straw knives and window bolts; glass; paper; drawing knives; iron squares; frying pans; currying combs; horn combs and whet stones; lamp black; stone jugs; iron and steel shovels and ditching shovels; nail and spike gimblets; grid irons, griddles and roasting pans; weights of all kinds; house, horse and sheep bells; sad irons; masons' trowels and stones of all kinds'' [NUes' Register, VI, 173). 272 Household Manufactures in the United States Except in certain out-of-the-way districts in the New England and middle states, both spinning and weaving in these regions passed into the factories, taking the women and girls with them, before 1830. The stages through which these operations passed in their transition from the homes to the factories were rather well marked. First, there was the stage in which the home was absolutely- independent of the factory; secondly, the stage in which the factory was supplementary to the home; thirdly, the stage in which the factory was preparatory to the home; and, finally, the stage in which the factory was independent of the home. A brief consideration of these stages will show how each succeeding one trespassed on the one preceding it, serving to lessen more and more the amount of work which had to be done in the home. But Uttle needs to be said here concerning the first and second stages. The first simply means that for a time in each new community it was necessary to perform all the operations relative to the making of cotton, linen, and woolen cloth within the home. A community remained in this stage imtil some arrangement was made for the setting up of a fulling-mill, the first supplementary agency to the household factory. Other similar agencies were the pressing, shearing, coloring, dyeing, and carding establish- ments which were run either in conjunction with or separate from the fulling-mill. Since these have been discussed else- where,' they may be dismissed here with mere mention. Besides the foregoing supplementary agencies to the family textile factory there were factories which wove » Pp. 252 ff. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 273 cloth from the yarn spun in the homes, and spinning-mills which furnished the women with yarn for their looms. The former were in operation before the close of the colonial period. The American Manufactory, located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, was an establishment to manufacture cotton, linen, and woolen cloth from yarn spun by the women in the vicinity.' More important, however, than the few similar establishments and even the professional weavers of the country were the mills for spinning yarn and thread. It was quite natural for improvements in spinning to precede those in weaving, since the weavers were always crowding the spinners for yarn. On account of the British government's policy of forbidding under penalty the exportation of the inventions of Hargreaves, Arkwright, and Crompton relative to spinning, America did not acquire the latest improvements along this line until some years after they were in successful 'Evidence of this is found in the following advertisement which appeared in the Pa. Packet and Gen. Advertiser, December 4, 1775: "To the good women of the province. As the spinning of yam is a great part of the business in cloth manufactures in those countries where they are carried on extensively and to the best advantage, the women of the whole country are employed as much as possible. The managers of the American Manufactory in the city, wish to employ every good spiimer that can apply however remote from the factory, and as many women in the country may supply themselves with the materials there, and may have leisure to spin considerable quantities, they are hereby informed that ready money will be given at the factory, up Market street, for any parcel, either great or small, of hemp, flax or woolen yarn. The managers return their thanks to all these industrious women who are now employed in spinning for the factory. The skill and diligence of many entitles them to public acknowl- edgement. We hope that, as you have begun, so you will go on, and never be weary in well doing" (quoted by Bagnall, The Textile Industries in the U.S., pp. 70 f.). 274 Household Manufactures in the United States operation in England. While spinning machinery was used in Philadelphia as early as 1775 and the common jenny and stock card were in operation in various parts of the country before 1790, yet this latter date is generally accepted as the birth year of the factory system in the United States. It was this year that Samuel Slater erected at Pawtucket, Rhode Island, a cotton factory, which was supplied with spinning machinery on the English plan.' Soon after the success of this mill had been demonstrated, others were erected in New England and throughout other sections of the country as well.^ These mills spun yarn and thread for distribution to the families of the neighborhood to be woven into the cloth they needed for themselves or which they desired to sell.' If there chanced 'Wright, "The Factory System in the United States," loth Census of U.S., Manufactures, pp. 6 f. ' A second was erected in Rhode Island in 179s; two more in Massa- chusetts in the years 1803 and 1804; ten more were erected or begun in Rhode Island and one in Connecticut during the years 1805, 1806, and 1807, making a total of fifteen erected before 1808. At the beginning of 1811 there were eighty-seven mills, working 80,000 spindles, spinning 2,880,000 pounds of yam worth $3,240,000, and employing 500 men and 3,500 women. All these were for spinning cotton. At the same date there were eleven for spinning wool, and a smaller number for spinning flax (Gallatin, "Report on Manufactures," Am. State Papers, "Finance," II, 427). •> An idea of the extent and value of this work can be secured from the following petition to the United States Congress in 1815 by the cotton manufactures in Providence, Rhode Island. These petitioners said: "But the benefits resulting from this vast amount of labor are much more extensively diffused than if the whole were done by people constantly engaged in the business, a considerable portion of it being done by persons who are partially occupied in other pursuits, particularly the weaving, which is almost wholly executed at the farmhouses throughout the country, few of which are to be found not supplied with looms" {Niles' Register, IX., \qo). Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 275 to be no mill in the neighborhood, a supply could be secured at the store in exchange for cotton, wool, and other farm products.' The yarn was not expensive and it proved a great convenience to the housewives, since its use enormously diminished their labors. Spinning- mills became so common throughout the country that it is proper to speak of a mill stage in connection with the rise of textile manufactures in any given section. The New England and middle states passed through such a stage between 1790 and 1820, the southern states between 1812 and 1830,^ and the Ohio Valley states between 1830 and i860.' The completion of the textile manufacturing system came with the introduction of the power-loom. This important event happened in 1815, at Waltham, Massachu- setts,'' thirty years after its invention by Cartwright. While there had been factories run entirely independently of the homes before this date,^ yet the introduction of such a tremendous time- and labor-saver, in the matter of cloth-weaving, ushered in a period of independence never before known. The establishments could now individually employ all the various processes in the manu- facture of cloth, from the receipt of the raw material to the production of the finished web. Thus the factory S5^tem proper came into existence in this country. While ' Somers, Hist, of Lancaster, N.H., p. 370. 'Clark, "Manufactures," op. cit., V, 318 ff. ' Lippincott, op. cit., chap. iv. ' De Bow, Indust. Resources of the S. and W., I, 222. 5 See Bagnall, op. cit., chaps, iv and v. 276 Household Manufactures in the United States it had a hard time during the decade from 1815 to 1825 on account of foreign competition, lack of capital, inferior machinery, lack of skilled labor, and a coarse quality of raw materials, yet at the same time by 1830 the system was sufficiently established in the New Englfind, the middle states, and certain centers in the West to assure a future independence of foreign manufactures for the various fabrics in domestic use, and to relieve the house- wives of a great deal of the strenuous labor which their foremothers had been obliged to perform. For when the price of the ordinary brown shirting was reduced from 42 to 7I cents a yard between 1815 and 1830,^ there was little inducement for one to labor all day at the loom to weave four yards of such cloth. The housewives could no longer compete against a system which made it possible for one man tending three or four power-looms to turn out from 90 to 160 yards a day.^ In spite of the improvements in the means of trade and transportation, the rise of the factory system, and the presence of an army of handicraftsmen in the country during the first quarter of the nineteenth century, family manufactures were by no means given up; for all of these factors combined were not able continuously to furnish the country with a sufficient quantity of clothing and household textile supplies. So it was well that there 'The price of brown shirting three-fourths of a yard wide between 1808 and 1830 in New England was as follows: 1808 to 18x5, 42 cents a yard; 1815, 36; 1816, 30; 1817 and i8i8, 22; 1819, 18; 1820-23, 13; 1823 and 1824, 12I; 182s, iij; 1826, 1827, and 1828, 11; 1829, 6|; 1830, 7i {Documents Relative to the Manufactures in the U.S. [1832], I, 173). ' BoUes, Indust. Hist, of the U.S., p. 414. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 277 existed side by side with them others which tended to increase the amoiuit of home manufacturing. Since these have already been listed,' the discussion may turn at once to a portrayal of their influence. During the period from 1807 to 1816, when trade with England and France was so uncertain, irregular, and even dangerous, many inventions to aid family manufactures came into use. These included an improved carding- machine, spinning-jenny, loom with a flying shuttle, and in the early twenties a machine for dressing flax.^ By the use of this inexpensive machinery the output of the home could be greatly increased.^ With the spinning-jenny, invented by John Schofield, a woman could spin from twenty to thirty runs of fine yarn a day in the best of manner. Besides increasing the possible output of yarn from the work of one spinner, the jenny could be con- veniently worked in a private family and bought for about $50. It was customary for families to join in buying one. The machine for which Burgiss Allison, of Philadelphia, secured a patent in 18 12 drove from ten to fifteen spindles and occupied very little more space than the common - P. 268. ' One Samuel Davidson, of Romulus, New York, put a machine on the market in 1822 for dressing flax. The cost of this machine was but $40. The saving in labor was about three-fourths and that of flax one-fifth compared with the common mode. The process of rotting could be dispensed with. A neighborhood usually had one of these machines {Niles' Register, XXHI, i). 'The improved carding-machine could be purchased for about $60, the spinning-machine for from $10 to $30, and the machine for dressing flax for about $40 (Niks' Register, XXIII, i; Jefferson, Works [Federal ed.], XI, 260, 272). 278 Household Manufactures in the United States spinning-wheel. It spun wool and could be used for cotton if the cotton was previously carded into rolls.' That this machine and the other improvements mentioned above were in common use is evidenced by the follow- ing quotation from a letter of Jefiferson's to Kosciusko, June 28, 1812: Our manufactures are now very nearly on a footing with those of England We have reduced the large and expensive machin- ery for most things to the compass of a private family, and every family of any size is now getting machines on a small scale for their household processes. Quoting myself as an example, and I am much behind many others in this business, my household manu- factures are just getting into operation on the scale of a carding machine costing $60 only, which may be worked by a girl of twelve years old, a spinning machine, which may be made for f 10, carrying 6 spindles for wool, to be worked by a girl also, another which can be made for $25, carrying 12 spindles for cotton, and a loom, with a flying shuttle, weaving its twenty yards a day. I need 2000 yards of linen, cotton and woollen yearly, to clothe my family, which this machinery, costing $150 only, and worked by two women and two girls, will more than furnish.^ The difficulties and restrictions thrown in the way of foreign trade and transportation just after 1807, which in turn caused an advance in the price of foreign goods, forced a multitude of families to resort to their own labor to supply many of life's necessities. Both the territorial extent and the amount of manufacturing done in the homes in 1809 have already been shown by the elaborate table based on the returns of the marshals in the fall of ' Bishop, op. cit., II, 188. "Jefferson, Works (Federal ed.), XI, 260, 272. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 279 1 8 10.' While there are no statistics in existence to show for the country as a whole whether there was a per capita increase or decrease during the decade between 1810 and 1820, yet at the same time there is sufficient evidence to estabhsh the fact that there was probably little decrease in the matter of clothing and household textile supplies made in the home during these years. The contents of a letter from a Delaware farmer quoted by Niles in the June 23, 182 1, issue of the Register suggest both the amount and the value of the clothing made in one family. The writer said that in 1809 he began (since when he had bought only one coat) to clothe himself and family, ten in number, in homespun by the houseloom. At the rate of $30 a year for each member this farmer estimated that he had saved by such acts in his family $300 a year, which in the twelve years since 1809 amounted to $3,660.'' Another family near Baltimore, consisting of about twenty persons, was spending in 1814 not over $60 a year for foreign manu- factured textiles, the family factory suppl5ang the needs and some to sell.' Commenting on this fact, Niles said: "Now this gentleman is a mere farmer — but while he and his males attend to the field, the females are equally busy in the house, and the long winter evenings are not wasted by the children and servants in doing mischief or wasting fire-wood, because they have nothing else to do. ... . This is the case in thousands of families."'' Jefferson said of Virginia in 181 2: "Every family in the country is a manufactory within itself, and is very generally " See chap. v. 3 Niles, Register, XI, 178. 'Vol. XX, 257. ilbid. 28o Household Manufactures in the United States able to make within itself all the stouter and middling stuff for its own clothing and household use.'" In 1814 the families in Berkshire County, Massachusetts, were making great quantities of woolen goods for sale outside of the state.* It seems that the making and wearing of homespun became a fad about this date. Speaking of this fact in 1814, a well-informed editor said: "It is astonishing to be informed of the extent to which this industry is applied. Many of the most elegant belles that trip our streets are covered with superb shawls, and otherwise protected from the cold, by the labor of their own hands — hands that, heretofore, chiefly held a romance or touched a piano. "^ This same editor in summing up conditions relative to household manufactures in 1816 felt that their actual value was not less than $120,000,000 a year, and that four-fifths of the laboring classes in the coimtry were generally clothed wholly in household manufactures.'' Before the War of 1812 came to a close smaU manu- facturing establishments had been set up in almost every nook and comer of the more settled portions of the New England, the middle states, and certain sections of the West. These establishments offered a dependable market for the produce of the flocks and fields of the northern ' Works (Federal ed.), XI, 218. What Jefferson thought of the family industry in 181 2 is shown in the following statement which he made to John Adams in a letter June 21 of this year: "The economy and thriftiness resulting from household manufactures are such that they will never again be laid aside" (j,bid., p. 219). » NUes' Register, VII, 280. 3 Ibid., VII, 280. * Ibid., X, 323. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 281 fanners and increased the demand for the staples of the southern planters. The country as a whole seemed well on the way toward an economic independence of foreign nations in all the common necessities of life. Progress toward this much-to-be-desired independence received a serious backset from the flood of foreign goods which poured into the covmtry immediately following the Treaty of 1815. English merchants had accumulated during the duration of the war a large supply of woolens, cotton cloth, and iron ware that had to be disposed of even at a loss. They felt that the American trade must be recovered even if it had to be done by selling their wares at a much lower price than they were sold in London. Besides those from England, ships came from Holland and Russia, bringing sail duck and linen; from China and India, carrying nankeens and silks. These goods were hurried to the auction blocks and many of the more wealthy class of citizens, who were tiring of their homespun, seized the first chance to buy the finer stuffs.' The result of all this activity in transporting and marketing foreign goods was disastrous to the growing domestic manufactures. Table XIV shows the extent of the disaster in one county and city in the country. What happened to the manufacturing establishments in the city and county of Philadelphia between 18 14 and 1819 happened to similar establishments the country over; and, what is more, the disaster did not stop with ' For fuller treatments of this enormous surplus of foreign goods, see Niks' Register, X, 322 f.; Lee, N. J. as Col. and State, III, 139 £f.; and Coman, Indust. Hist, of U.S., p. 138. 282 Household Manufactures in the United States the factory owners and workers — it reached the farmers and planters as well. For when the market for the products TABLE XIV Diminution of Manupactdees in the City and County of Philadelphia, 1814-19* Branches of ManuEacturing Number of Hands Employed in 1814 igi6 iSrg Cotton Hosiery Thread Silver-plating Smithery Coach-making Chemicals Hatting Carving and gilding Potteries Tobacco pipes Printing ink Book-printing Type foundry Brass foundry Wire factory Floor-cloth manufactory Woolen Iron casting Paper-making Coppersmith and tinware Gun-smithery Cabinetmaking Brush-making Plaster and stucco Bricklaying Patent-lamp making Morocco, leather, etc Ropemaking Paper-hanging and playing cards Total 1,761 96 444 114 852 220 71 134 62 132 33 S 198 74 300 60 SO 1.310 1.093 9SO 77 1S4 180 65 120 250 6 68 no 189 2,32s 48 191 210 7SO i8s S2 172 121 132 33 S 241 90 240 22 30 1,226 1,152 95° 77 124 250 112 ISO 300 5 III 200 168 149 29 20 30 149 67 16 60 24 27 o I 170 42 80 6 25 260 52 175 35 93 70 50 90 ISO I 84 100 82 9,188 9,672 2>i37 » Niles' Register, XVII, 117. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 283 of the flocks and fields was cut off, the country people found themselves without the necessary exchange to secure the foreign goods even at the low price for which they were selling. Hence, the only thing left for these people was to fall back upon the old stand-by, the family factory, just as their forefathers had done when faced with like condi- tions following the Revolutionary War. Some idea of the extent to which the family factory was brought back into operation is given in the following account from Hodgson, who toured the country during the three years following 1818. In speaking of family manufactures, he said: I am surprised to find to how great an extent this species of manufactures is carried, and how rapidly the events of the last two years have increased it. In some parts of the state of New York, I was told the little farmers could not make a living without it. In Pennsylvania, it is perhaps more general; some of the lower descrip- tions of East India goods having almost entirely given place to a domestic substitute actually made in the family; and the importation of Irish linen having been most seriously checked by the greatly increased cultivation and manufacture of flax in the immediate vicinity of Philadelphia. In Virginia and North Carolina, I had opportimities of seeing these domestic manufactures as I passed in the stage: and on my horseback route, it was a constant source of siuprise — to you, I may add, without danger of being suspected to be a Radical, and of gratification; for this combination of agri- culture and manufacture in the same family appears to me to form a state of society of all others best adapted to produce a happy, independent, and virtuous population.' The foregoing was the observation of a foreigner. That his estimates were not exaggerated is shown by statements made at about the same date by editor Niles ' Letters from N. A., II, 71. 284 Household Manufactures in the United States and Henry Clay. In a debate in the House of Repre- sentatives, April 26, 1820, the latter spoke as follows: If you want to find an example of order, of freedom from debt, of economy, of expenditure falling short of rather than exceeding income, you will go to a well regiilated family of a farmer. You will go to the house of such a man as Isaac Shelby. You wUl not find him resorting to taverns, engaged in broils, prosecuting angry law suits. You will behold every, member of his family clad with the product of their own hands, and usefully employed — ^the spinning wheel and the loom in motion by day-break. With what pleasure will his wife carry you into her neat dairy, lead you into her store- house, and point to the table cloths, the sheets, the counterpanes, which lie on this shelf for her daughter Sally, or that for Nancy, all prepared in advance by their provident care, for the day of their respective marriages.' Niles spoke no less enthusiastically in September, 182 1, when he said: We never reflect upon the progress and prospects of that portion of the national labor which is applied to household manufactures, with- out feeling our hearts warmed with a national pride; for all the virtues — ^moral, religious and political, are interested, in it. Tens of thou- sands of amiable, respectable and lovely yoxmg women, (ladies, if the term pleases better), of those ranks and conditions in life which, a few years since, almost as much despised a distaff as they did a field- hoe, are now engaged to drive away the diseases and distresses of inanity, and keep themselves in health and cheerfulness, render them- selves good wives, and estimable mothers, while they add to the com- forts and conveniences of their parents, and make a "plentiful house" by a diligent attention to spinning, weaving, bleaching, dyeing, etc., by which all the real wants of the family, as to articles of clothing, are supplied, with something still left to furnish themselves with more delicate and luxurious articles for their own ornament or use." • Annals of i6th Cong., I Sess., II, column 2041. ' Register, XXI, 35. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 285 Evidence is not lacking to show that these men were keen observers. An agricultural society in Pennsylvania in 1822 granted W. C. Terrel a premium for the greatest quantity of goods made by one family — the amoimt being 1,600 yards of different kinds of cloth besides many stock- ings and much yarn which were sold.' At a cattle show and fair in Pittsfield, Massachusetts, in 1822, a Mrs. Perkins exhibited ample proof that, since the last anniversary, she and four girls had manufactured 438 yards of fulled cloth, 171I yards of raw flannel, 53 yards of carpeting, 142I yards of tablecloth and other linen goods, in all 805! yards.^ At Cross Creek, Washington County, Pennsyl- vania, in this same year, about one hundred young men met and unanimously resolved that in paying their address to the young ladies they would give most marked preference to such as clothed themselves in homespun and made use of articles grown in their own country.' During the simimer and fall of 182 1 two daughters of a Virginia farmer, besides going two quarters to school, spun 160 pounds of wool. In the house of this farmer's father no thread « was spun except a little for making shoes, dependence ' Ibid., XXIII, 144. " Ibid., XXII, 266. 'Ibid., XXII, 195. In commenting on this resolution Niles said: "'The deuce is in it'; provided these resolutions are maintained on both sides, if it does not become fashionable in this country to be clothed in homespun. But, indeed, there are many farmers in Pennsylvania and New York, etc., worth more than so>ooo dollars, who hardly expend 10 dollars a year for foreign articles of clothing; and by hundreds of others, their daughters are required to make as much homespun goods, beyond the family wants, as will furnish themselves with such imported things as they desire to have. The present pinching times are doing wonders for the good of our country." 286 Household Manufactures in the United States being entirely upon European goods. The son found that when he depended on this same source his family- was always bare of bedclothes, table linen, etc., but since he had been relying on the family factory there was not only plenty of these things, but piles of them in reserve.' In summing up the conditions as he saw them the country over in about 1822, Holmes said: Before I quit the subject of manufactures, it is proper to state, that household, or domestic manufactures of woollen, linen &c. are carried on to a great extent: many thousands of families spin and make up their own clothing, sheets, table linen, &c. They purchase cotton yam, and have it frequently mixed with their linen and woollen. Blankets, quilts, or coverlets, in short, nearly every article of domestic use, is made, or a great part made, in the fanuly. It is supposed that nearly two-thirds of all the clothing, linen, blankets, &c. of those inhabitants who reside in the interior of the country, are of home or household manufacture. It is the same in the interior with soap and candles, for they have no excisemen to prevent their making those articles in the family.^ During the early twenties and even later it was very common to exhibit family manufactures at the agri- cultural fairs which were held throughout New York and other eastern states. Itemized statements of premiums awarded at these fairs show both the variety and amount of goods made in some homes. Four such statements of premiums given by the Ontario County, New York, Agricultural Society for the year 1822 follow: (i) In the family of Seth Jones, Bristol: 319 yards of linen cloth, 25 of kersey for bags, 42 of shirting, 35 of diaper, 52 of cotton and ? Niks' Register, XXI, 36. ^ An Account of the U.S. of Am. (1823), p. 208. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 287 linen, 199 of woolen cloth, 16 of kersey for blankets, 24 of plain flannel for blankets, 28 of cotton and wool, 34 of cotton, 22 of worsted, 30 pairs of socks, 7 pairs of stockings, 3 pairs of mittens, s bed quilts, 1 carpet, 27 pairs of pantaloons, 23 frocks, 2 surtouts, 4 coats, 4 sailor coats, 12 aprons, i bed tick, 7 blankets, 10 flannel sheets, 20 linen sheets, 30 shirts, 5 vests and 12 kersey bags. (2) In the family of Nathaniel Allen, Richmond: 4865 yards of linen cloth, 193 yards of woolen cloth and enough yarn on hand to make 77 yards more, 5 bed quilts, 4 feather bed ticks, 20 pairs of woolen socks, 14 pairs of woolen stockings, 9 pairs of mittens for men and boys, 29 pairs of pantaloons, 9 coats and surtouts, 9 vests, 16 pairs of linen pillow cases, 21 linen sheets, 24 diaper towels, 3 diaper table cloths, 12 kersey towels, 12 kersey bags, 20 frocks, i mantle, 2 great coats for females, 15 runs of thread, 9 runs of worsted stocking yam and 43 shirts. (3) In the family of William Ottley, Phelps: 201 yards of linen cloth, 69 of diaper, 30 of linen check, 112 of fulled cloth, 89 of flannel, 28 of pressed flannel, 8 of linen handkerchiefs, 11 of cotton and woolen coverlets, 20 of double work blankets, i pair of rose blankets, 14 pairs of women's stockings, 10 pairs of socks, 3 pairs of mittens, 16 runs of worsted yam for stockings, and 6 runs of linen thread. (4) In the family of James Harland, Manchester: drj yards of fulled cloth, 16 of pressed flannel, 20 of mixed flannel, 465 of plain flannel, 16 of diaper, 105 of tow cloth, 35 of kersey, 2 coverlets, s towels, s pairs of pillow cases, 3 pairs of tow and linen sheets, i feather bed, i under bed tick, r pair of horse blankets, 3 pairs of socks, s pairs of women's stockings, 5 meal bags, and 42 yards of worsted plaid, spun and partly woven not having time to finish.' It should be kept in mind that the cases cited above were the extraordinary ones. It was for this reason that they received the premiums. Be this as it may, there is excellent evidence at hand to show that other families in New York state were by no means neglecting this ' mies' Register, XXIII, 181. 288 Household Manufactures in the United States TABLE XV One Year's Outptjt of Household Textile Manupactukes IN New York, 1820-21 Counties No. Yards Fulled Cloth No. Yards Flannel and Other Woolen Cloth Not Fulled No. Yards Cotton; Linen, and Other Thin Cloth Total Yards of AU Kinds of Cloth Population in 1820 Per Capita Yards Albany Alleghany . . Broome .... Cattaraugus . Cayuga .... Chautauqua . Chenango. . . Clinton .... Columbia Cortland. . ; , Delaware.. . . Dutchess . . . , Erie Essex Franklin. . . . Genesee Green Herkimer Jefferson. . . . King's Lewis Livingston.., Madison. . . . Monroe Montgomery Niagara Oneida Onondaga. . . Orange Ontario Oswego Otsego Putnam Queen's Rensselaer. . . Richmond. . . 43.146 io,S9S 20,460 2,177 80,323 15.758 59.990 20,249 73.450 32.465 46.715 58.974 21.473 25,270 6,179 73.150 32.464 60,785 54.470 462 16,890 32,832 63.456 41,358 71.22s 7,062 87.951 74.346 44.995 "6,945 16,061 86,071 14,914 15,857 65,012 25 48,796 17,319 20,886 4,283 98,256 18,647 73,808 19,729 64,121 38,671 64,392 65,465 22,487 28,302 7,450 7S,i8o 32,129 67,133 77,082 281 20,8 40,780 77,208 46,957 99,064 10,023 107,134 81,157 38,563 139,260 20,583 109,869 14,973 31,551 73,116 1,677 98,880 37,709 76,883 11,088 197,692 49,145 417.075 32.290 37.098 88,872 96,132 192,467 74,971 37,796 18,64s 153,346 77,341 307,913 144,758 18,807 41,422 53,680 153,224 97,650 131,306 19,865 2oi,S53 174,872 314,330 221,789 58,610 222,903 47,434 51,537 179,586 10,895 190,822 65,623 118,229 17,548 376,271 83,550 550,873 72,268 174,669 160,008 207,239 316,906 118,931 91,368 32,274 301,676 141,934 435,831 276,310 19,550 79,200 127,292 293,888 185,965 301,595 36,950 396,638 330,37s 397,888 477,994 95,254 418,843 77,321 98,945 317,714 12,597 38,116 9»330 14,343 4,090 38,897 12,568 31,215 12,070 38,330 16,507 26,587 46,615 12,811 4,439 58,093 22,996 31,017 32,952 11,187 9,227 32,208 37,569 22,990 50,997 41,467 41,213 88,267 12,374 44,856 11,268 21,519 40,153 6,135 S-oo 703 8.24 403 9.67 6.65 17.64 6.07 4.60 9.70 7.80 6.80 713 7.26 519 6.17 14 05 8.39 1-75 8.47 9.12 8"o3 1. 17 7-77 7.96 965 5 41 7.70 903 6.86 413 7-94 2.05 Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 289 TABLE XV— Continued Counties No. Yards Fulled Cloth No. Yards Flannel and Other Woolen Cloth Not Fulled No. Yards Cotton, Linen, and Other Thin Cloth Total Yards of All Kinds of Cloth Population in 1820 Per Capito Yards Rockland Saratoga Schenectady Schoharie S.IS9 68,61s 14,006 40,733 40,442 25,238 31,168 32,705 8,109 25,934 37,895 37,362 10,405 68,351 26,077 3,426 73,460 16,007 43,126 45,218 33,626 39,729 24,256 11,223 29.927 44,767 30,814 11,471 97,689 33,152 255,539 144,871 21,494 77,499 109,880 62,339 80,265 97,105 31,474 91,525 103,549 119,992 22,803 165,218 119,392 264,124 286,946 51,507 161,358 195,540 121,203 151,162 154,066 50,806 147,386 186,211 188,168 44,679 331,258 178,621 8,837 36,052 13,081 23,154 23,619 16,037 21,989 24,272 8,900 16,971 20,861 30,934 9,453 38,831 32,638 29.89 7.96 393 6.96 8.27 7-55 6.89 6.43 5- 70 8.67 8.92 6.08 St. Lawrence . . . Steuben Suffolk Sullivan Tioga Tompkins Ulster Warren Washington .... Westchester* . . . 4.72 8.52 5-47 Total 1,965,754 2,295,111 5,652,509 9,913,374 1,248,035 7-94 * Jour, of the Assembly ofN.Y., 4Sth Session, 1822, App. A, p. 60. The total population was not talien. The population statistics are from the United States census for 1820. Nothing was reported from the counties of Hamilton and New York. There were gg3 fulling-mills and 1,235 carding-machines reported, which indicates that fulling and carding werelargely done outside of the homes. Erie, Livingston, and Monroe counties were formed after the census reports for 1820 were in, hence there are no population statistics on which to base per capita yards. New York County had a population of 123,706, and Hamilton, I|2SI- important industry. In March, 182 1, the state legislature authorized a census of the state to be taken. Fortunately for this discussion this census included data on house- hold manufactures. Table XV exhibits the results along this line. The discussion in this chapter thus far has dealt with the transfer from family- to shop- and factory-made goods without any special reference to locality. Since conditions were not imif orm throughout the country at any particular 290 Household Manufactures in the United States date, it seems necessary before closing the chapter to summarize the movement and show its status in the New England and the middle states, in the South, and in the West and Northwest during the decade between 1820 and 1830. The discussion will now turn to this consideration, treating the sections in the order named. That section of the country north of Maryland and east of the Alleghany Mountains far outstripped the South and the West in the transfer during the period under con- sideration. In reality, the new order of things began in this region with the beginning of the nineteenth century, especially in those parts along the rivers and near the coast. The sawmills, gristmills, and fulling-mills gradually ceased to be of prime importance, jdelding their water rights to more extensive and profitable industries. The farms became less and less the chief means of support of the people, the farmers' children going into the factories and the one-time farming village becoming a thriving factory town. Indeed, the proprietor of a mill often employed the entire family. A case is on record where, in 1815, in the town of Clinton, Massachusetts, the father received $5.00 a week; his son, sixteen years old, $2.00; his daughter of thirteen, $1.50; his daughter of twelve, $1.25; his son of ten, $0.80; his sister, $2.33^; her son of thirteen, $1.50; and her daughter of eight, $0.75." This opportunity to secure work in the factory coupled with the reduction in the price of mill-made goods brought an end to the weaving and spinning operations within the ' Ford, Hist, of CUnton, Mass., p. 149. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 291 home in many sections of this region before the end of the third decade of the nineteenth century/ The foregoing conclusion is based on data contained in a report on manufactures made by the Secretary of the Treasury in 1832 in response to a resolution of the House of Representatives asking for material on which to base tariff legislation. While most of the material in the two large volumes deals with manufactures outside of the home, yet there were two questions relating to the status of those within the family between 1824 and 1832. They read as follows: "To what extent and what kinds of articles is household manufacture carried on in the county ? Has it increased or decreased, and to what extent, since 1824 ?" These queries along with thirty-eight others were sent in most cases to persons in a. position to have or to acquire reliable information relative to them as well as to the accompanying ones. While the answers were general and very incomplete, yet the fact that they were rather uniform indicates that they were more than mere guesses. A brief consideration of some of them will show the status of household manufactures at the time the reports were made and the decrease since 1824. From Rhode Island there were nine reports in which the foregoing questions were answered, eight stating that ' It should be said here that in various sections of New England between 1820 and 1830 a new household industry sprang up, namely, the making of palm-leaf hats. Stores would give out the material and pay the women and girls in calicoes, ribbons, and laces at the rate of from 14 to 20 cents a hat. In some towns 20,000 hats a year were made. This no doubt helped to decrease the other household manufactures, since it was much easier to make hats than to weave cloth (Documents Relative to the Manufactures in the U.S., I, 805). 292 Household Manufactures in the United States there had been a great diminution in household manu- factures since 1824. The following is the substance of the majority of the answers: Household manufacturing has been almost or wholly discontinued; female labor has been transferred to the factories; mill manufactures are substituted for household and are at a cheaper rate.' There was absolute unanimity of opinion among those answering from Vermont as to the decrease of household manufactures since 1824, the amount of the diminution varying from one-half to nine-tenths. The same reasons were given as in the case of Rhode Island, with the addi- tional one that because of the increase in the price of wool farmers sold their fleeces and purchased cloth with which to clothe their families.^ A general report based on the individual ones for the state of New Hampshire stated that there was not over four-fifths as much manufacturing done in the home then as formerly and that possibly one- half of the wearing apparel, carpeting, table linen, and bedding was made therein.' This estimate seems con- servative enough when viewed in connection with some of the individual reports. For example, the reporter from Richmond, Cheshire County, said that there was not one yard woven in 1832 where 100 were woven in 1824; that the American system had killed household manufactures; and that women who formerly worked at ' Documents Relative to the Manufactures in the U.S., I, 927 ff. ' Ibid., I, 90s ff. 5 Ibid., I, 585. The returns from the various counties and towns of New Hampshire were very full on amounts and values of goods made in the home. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 293 household manufacturing had gone into the large factories.' The reports from Massachusetts indicated that very little or no household manufacturing at all was done along the coast, while in the interior considerable was done, but not as much as formerly.^ The returns from Connecticut and Maine were too incomplete to be of any value on the point under consideration. For the New England states as a whole this answer was somewhat common: "In New England household manufactures are very generally discontinued, and female labor has been transferred to factories, where it is more profitably employed, and the inhabitants are supplied by the manufacturers with cottons for their consumption, in lieu of their household manufactures, at a much cheaper rate."^ Household manufactures in the middle states did not decrease from 1824 to 1830 as they did in New England. The meager reports from this section to the Secretary of the Treasury in 1832 indicated that the industry had diminished in New Jersey, increased in Pennsylvania and Delaware, no data on the subject coming from New York. The report from Bergen County, New Jersey, said that cotton goods had mostly superseded linen, which formerly was the chief household manufacture, the farmers and the mechanics having a market for their produce or industry, which enabled them to purchase goods for less a yard than it formerly cost to have flax spun." Conditions in Kent County, Delaware, were somewhat different. The low price of cotton yarn, occasioned by the improvement ' Ibid., I, 810. 3 Ibid., I, 946, 962. ' Ibid., I, 68, 87 f. ■• Ibid., 11, 137. 294 Household Manufactures in the United States in its manufacture, caused a considerable increase in household manufactures. In the opinion of the one making the report, fully one-half of the agricultural citizens in this county w6re clothed with the products of their own industry.' Eight of the nine accounts from western Pennsylvania said that family manufactures had increased since 1824, one placing the increase as high as 75 per cent." That these statements presented the situation as it really existed in this section of the state is evidenced by the report of a special committee on an exhibit of household manufactures in Washington County in 1828. This report read as follows:. The Cloths, Flannels, Baizes, Carpets, Linens, Bed Tickings, Coverlids, Hearth Rugs, Stockings etc. with several beautiful speci- mens of needle work, were such as to call forth the admiration of everyone who beheld them, and to furnish evidence (were evidence wanting) of the industry and taste of the ladies of Washington county. Amongst the great variety of household manufactures (about 150 in niimber) nothing appeared to excite greater attention than the sewing Silk, several poimds of which were exhibited, made by Mrs. Axtel, Riggs, Bombarger and Quail, and which we have no hesitation in pronoimcing equal to any imported silk we have seen.' Generally speaking, there had been as much progress made prior to 1830 in the matter of the transfer from family- to factory-made goods in that section of the country south of the Ohio River and Pennsylvania and ' Documents Relative to the Manufactures in the U.S., II, 674. = Ibid., II, 274 flf. ' "Report to the President and Directors of the Washington County [Pa.] Society, for the Promotion of Agriculture and Domestic Manufacture," Hazard, Register of Pa., II, 328. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 295 east of the Mississippi River as in the regions considered above. The invention of the cotton gin, the market for cotton created by Arkwright's machinery, improved transportation facilities, and slavery all combined to throw the South, outside of certain sections of the back- coimtry, once more upon her staple products of agriculture, just as had been the case with Virginia and Maryland during the colonial period. The great increase in the cultivation of cotton and rice between 1820 and 1830, the extension of the sugar industry in Louisiana, and the tobacco culture in Tennessee and Kentucky gave all of these regions staples which were in great demand; and because of this demand they were able to bear the expense of land transportation for a considerable distance, even over the poor roads of the new settlements. The many rivers in the South and the application of steam power to navigation made it possible to market the cotton and at the same time bring manufactured goods to the plantations. The great profits which accrued to the plantation- owners in South Carolina and the Gulf States from their attention to rice and cotton caused them to give up mixed farming and devote all their industrial forces to the raising of these staples. The effects of this system were soon felt in the other sections of the country. For example, the plantation had to have large supplies of such important products as pork, bacon, lard, beef, butter, cheese, corn, flour, apples, cider, vinegar, soap, candles, and whiskey. These were furnished by the farmers of Tennessee, Ken- tucky, and the Northwest. The manufactured goods 2g6 Household Manufactures in the United States came from Europe or from the New England and the middle states; and many of the slaves for the plantations calne from Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina. Thus, by 1830, the agricultural system in South Carolina and the Gulf states was furnishing a means whereby thousands- of people the country over could give up their former dependence upon their own labors for manufactured commodities. Cotton was indeed king. Through its production and sale the planters secured their manu- factured supplies from the East or from Europe, their supply of labor from the Old South, their necessary raw products from Kentucky, Tennessee, and the North- west, which in turn made it possible for the farmers of this latter region and the slave-breeders of the Old South to secure the means to supply themselves with manu- factured goods either from the European mills or from the mills of New England and middle states; for the great army of workers in the industrial and commercial towns in the East to secure theirs from the product of their labor in mills and stores and on ships, which in turn gave the farmers east of the AUeghanies an opportunity to exchange their produce for manufactured commodities. This industrial revolution brought about by the few-staple farming system of the South made it possible for the country as a whole to discontinue to a considerable degree= the old system of household manufacturing and supply itself either from the products of its own factories or from those of foreign countries. This transfer was by no means completed by 1830, yet it was well on the way, with every indication of ultimate success. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 297 Even though the foregoing statement is true for the greater portion of the South and Southwest in 1830, it should be said that there were to be found at this date many communities in the back-country districts living under semi-pioneer conditions. It is to be noted, however, that many things modern had reached even these com- munities. By 1820 spinning-jennies were familiar here. In 1825 one Cincinnati factory was selling, mostly in this region, $20,000 worth annually of machines, which, by the operation of a single crank, ginned, carded, and spun simultaneously six threads of cotton.' Indeed, the two decades following 18 12 mark the mill period in this region, mill-builders from the North coming in just after the War of 18 1 2. The yarn spun in these mills was given out to the settlers for raw wool or woven cloth. Plantations even came to be supplied with spinning-mills, the local demand supporting them at first, and later their output finding its way to the northern markets.^ The true status of the spinning and weaving operation in the whole back-country region is reflected in what Kercheval saw and heard in a farmhouse in the south- eastern part of Shenandoah County, Virginia, in about 1830. While going throligh this region he called at the house of a farmer where he saw five spinning-wheels at work. The wife, three daughters, and a hired girl were engaged in spinning finely prepared hemp. The visitor inquired of the mother whether she sold any part of the 'Clark, "Manufactures during the Ante-Bellum and War Periods," South in the Building of the Nation, V, 318. » Ibid., p. 321. 298 Household Manufactures in the United States domestic goods. Her answer was: "Yes; when de gals wants to puy some fine dings in de sthore, dey bay for it in linen and linsey; and I puy sugar and gofifee and salt and many dings we wants, imd bay for all of it in our own coods.'" It should be said in concluding the consideration of family or plantation manufactures in the South in about 1830 that whatever was done even by the slaves was rather unprofitable. Evidence of this fact is foimd in a letter from an overseer of a Georgia plantation to his employer, dated February 18, 183 1. On this plantation both cotton and woolen cloth were manufactured by slaves. In calling his employer's attention to the unprofitableness of the work of the slaves engaged in spinning warp the overseer showed in his letter that the warp made by four slaves in a year could be bought at the factory for $120. Now, when $80 was subtracted for the cotton annually spxm and an equal amount for boarding and clothing the slaves, there was a deficit. This deficit was avoided on some plantations by buying the warp and spinning wool only.^ In all those regions of the West and Northwest where the floating pioneer population of the earher days had given way to the succeeding wave which was composed of people who desired to settle down and establish per- manent homes, the transfer under consideration in this chapter had made remarkable progress before the close of the third decade of the nineteenth century. While the pioneer costumes and customs had undergone astound- ing changes even before 1820, yet it was between this ' Kercheval, op. cit., p. 202. " Phillips, op. cit., I, 334. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 299 date and 1830 that the great revolution in most every phase of life in these sections occurred. Between 1790 and 1830 manufacturing establishments of almost every description grew up along the Ohio and other rivers. The appearance of the steamboat made the distribution of the output of these establishments possible, as well as overcame the disadvantages of the industrial isolation that was so marked during earlier days, when the western country was practically as far from the eastern markets as the Atlantic coast settlements were from the European during the colonial period. Since many of the immigrants who came west between 1820 and 1830 were from the older sections of the country where household industrial dependence had ceased to be necessary, they were unwilling, except in cases of sheer necessity, to revert to the primitive modes of Hfe practiced by their ancestors; hence all that was needed were facilities to supply them with goods formerly made in the homes. Such facilities existed in the thriving manufacturing estabhshments, the army of handicraftsmen in the towns and villages, and the steam- boats on the navigable rivers. A rather minute and perhaps somewhat exaggerated portrayal of the change that took place in the wearing apparel of the people in the older sections of the West between 1818 and 1830 is on record from the pen of one who was a close observer of the manners and customs of his day. His account follows: A most remarkable change occurred during this period [1818 to 1830] and a little before, in the habits of dress and appearance of the people. Before the year 1830, a man dressed in the costume of the 300 Household Manufactures in the United States territory, which was a raccoon-cap, Imsey hunting-shirt, buckskin breeches and moccasins, with a belt around the waist, to which the butcher-knife and tomahawk on the side and back were appended, was rarely to be seen. The blue linsey hunting-shirt with red or white fringe, had given place to the cloth coat; the raccoon-cap with the tail of the animal dangling down behind, had been thrown aside for hats of wool or fur. Boots and shoes had supplanted the deer-skin moccasins, and the leather breeches, strapped tight around the ancle, had disappeared before unmentionables of modern material. The female sex had made a still greater progress in dress. The old sort of cotton or woolen frocks, spun, wove and made with their own fair hands, and striped and cross-barred with blue dye and turkey red, had given place to gowns of silk and calico. The feet, before in a state of nudity, now charmed in shoes of calfskin or slippers of kid; and the head formerly unbonnetted but covered with a cotton handkerchief, now displayed the charms of the female face, under many forms of bonnets of straw, silk, or leghorn. The young ladies, instead of walking a mile or two to church on Sunday, carrying their shoes and stockings in their hands to within a hundred yards of the place of worship as formerly, now came forth arrayed complete in all the pride of dress, mounted on fine horses, and attended by their male admirers.' While the foregoing is interesting and at the same time contains much truth, yet the picture of farm life in central Ohio in about 1832, by another contemporary, probably portrays somewhat more accurately conditions as they generally existed throughout the older portions of the West and Northwest at this date. According to this writer the spHt broom was yet found in every household, as were also the big and little spinning-wheels, the weaving, however, being for the most part done by the neighborhood weaver. The village or crossroads blacksmith made most » Ford, A Hist, of III., p. 94. Transition to Shop- and Factory-Made Goods 301 of the farm implements; water-mills on the streams did all the grinding of the grain; the village tanner tanned the hides into leather on the halves; the itmerant shoe- maker made the shoes for his neighborhood; smaU dis- tilleries scattered throughout every county made whiskey from the corn, rye, or barley; maple sugar and syrup were made for the family's use; the everyday clothing was generally of the homespun variety, the men usually having a Sunday suit of broadcloth and the women and girls an extra one or two, for dress occasions, of alpaca, merino, or other fine goods, as well as fashionable bonnets, shawls, and wraps of various kinds. Each village had its store, which took, in exchange for goods, all sorts of farm produce, such as butter, eggs, cheese, rags, feathers, beeswax, tallow, lard, hops, corn, pork, cider, fur, and ginseng.' It should be said in closing this section that while flax brakes, hackles, looms, spinning-wheels, handnulls, and cider-mills were common implements in most rural households, and that straw hats, shoes, clothing, and household textUe supplies were common articles of family production about 1830 and even after, yet, as the imported goods became more easily obtainable on accoimt of their low price and the market for the output of the farm, the establishment of water-mills and horsemiUs for grinding corn, wheat, rye, and barley in each community, as well as tanneries and distilleries, it became possible, profitable, and desirable for the people to replace their pioneer food, furniture, implements, and dress with shop-, mill-, and 'Welker, "Farm Life in Central Ohio Sixty Years Ago," Western Reserve Hist. Soc. Tracts, IV, No. 86, pp. 43 fif. 302 Household Manufactures in the United States factory-made products. This transfer from family- to factory-made goods, that had made so much headway by 1830 in all the older regions of the western country, grad- ually increased in territorial extent and the number of articles during the next few decades and by i860 was practically completed in all its more important phases. The succeeding chapter shows statistically the progress and final general completion of this transfer.' ' For additional references on tlie change tfiat occurred in social and industrial conditions in the West and Northwest between 1820 and 1830, see Patterson, "Early Society in Southern Illinois," Fergus Hist. Series, I, No. 14, pp. 109 fE.; Haines, "Social Life and Scenes in the Early Settle- ment of Southern Illinois," Trans. III. State Hist. Soc, No. 10, pp. 36 f. and pp. 39!.; Esa,Tey,Loga,n, Hist, of Ind., p. 424; McMath, "The Willow Run Settlement," Mich. Pioneer and Hist. Soc. Colls., XTV, 491 f.; andHowells, Recollections of Life in Ohio from 181 3 to 1840, chaps, xviii and xx. CHAPTER VIII THE PASSING OF THE FAMH^Y FACTORY The industrial revolution which occurred in the United States during the three decades next following 1830 put an end to the family system of manufacturing as it had existed up to this date. During these thirty years the transfer from family- to factory-made goods made such rapid strides that the end of the period found family-made goods the exception rather than the general rule as formerly. While some of the new-made settlements and those abso- lutely devoid of transportation facilities were forced to maintain the primitive modes of life, yet the former escaped such conditions much earlier in their history than settle- ments established before 1830. Fortunately, statistics are at hand to show the gradual diminution of household manufactures between 1830 and i860. These statistics relate to one state as to the decrease in quantity and to the country as a whole as to the decline in value, both gross and per capita. They are presented in some detail in the following pages. WHAT HAPPENED IN ONE STATE (nEW YORk) The slow but certain passing of the family factory is well illustrated by what happened in New York in the matter of household textile manufactures between 1825 and 1855. The constitutions of 1821 and of 1845 ^ this 303 304 Household Manufactures in the United States M OOOOOOOhOOOOOOOOOOOOOO -ooooo I ^ t-M O lot H ■/> ^ tn «J»0 MTtwW ^itO N M**«OfOM«*)« ^0«OM**>MW««^ «>0 xn »o ^so 10 Oi OiOO Ot O t^ «o to »^»o N « * ^ nso M e« MOO 00 r^o OiQO ^l/)0 ^^ViN ^wj« »»j O t^OOOOO O t^Ott>.-^c« o w O O O M 000 »/5« w»nOi»Ow Oir*'*^^^ wjvo o Oi Oi «> *^ ^M ^ « 0» 00 M m CO *^00 00 woo O't^'*t*>'O»0 »^00 W5 n '^O « « M ^f 00 N O 00 Tf "-O ^«POt^diN'^'*&0 woo" >/> fO M w M 00 »osO >o tC t9»0 o dioo *^ ^ -^ N c*30 to M M e* to (O 0*0 M « co'tC " — O 'tfcOtOVjioM fO'it'^W coo to M M e* to (O C0*0 M « tO'TOiWW ^O 00 ^00 a tooo oi c _ - . .. _ . , -. . - _ VO 00 O *0 VO ^00 O r^ r^OO 0> <^ to O Ot t> ^ tOOO «• 0> Oi M QiOO Oi Tf V( V) (^ M O 00 M \0 Vito OiC4 OtO OiHO HO vioo OiOO -^ OiO N H OiOO O « 10 t^ lO H OiOO 00 N MOOO « Tj-Tj-OiH ^ ^ ^ *1 '^'^ «o °* * ^ ■* «C o wo ■^ « C^ (OMfOci CI ^n H MOO r*tO« w "lOCTOOO O 00 >0 Oi O ^00 »000 Oi M wOOOOp^OcOO^V) O O OiOiOOOO MO Oto -^lOt^OO ■* O OOOO •* 0000000 H 0>0 OOD O «OH tOOoO tOM O "OWOO tO^O ^»^ioi-t toOO \o o >o f^ Ot »n M *noo ^- O »o o> vj\6 h r« to m o m >o OiOin 0>0« 00 >0 tOOO iomO ^M tJ-hO ^m Oi 000 ^00 00 O M «o « OiOi OiOO I Oi CO N o ^vi »noo HOO OiawiOir^O*M Oi^cow t^^»o« t^M < "o 3S to to M rf M Oi 00 t* *t O w» r- coo to Oi O "tO « tO 00 M W O t«- t>. »O00 VJO W O tOOO »O00 O OiO O O «MHHC t» Oi M Coo Q t^ Q 00 t^ OiH 0< M ■*0 ■* M 1^0 H t^ ■«i- Oi ^ w «oO M toOi OiM M 0" 0" t^O (ooo ^ do" «^ d dl t^O V, Ml Tl-00 -* SSR&SiS-RSS ** Oi rOOO »^ H Oi * N r» to t* M to 000 00 ■* M 10 cOOO O H 00 *^ CO M «n COO *«■ •* H « H M H MOO N TUnO t^ COOO wj Oi O H e^ 00 r^ !>. to O "to O »o t^ to d r^ too od d M d c?J" dod ^O M OiOoO Oit- t^O t« tOtO MtOMtOM ^ ll coo o CO 000 ocoooooo r*tOM oioo 00 N ooMtncoiOHOM m cooo 00 m n n rt Cfc n ^ «,«-> ^ n «>«« "''^"— "IWOvpoOOMOM t-OO O Oi 100 t^OO O 00 00 00 00 t»O00 W . B " - a> o o rt _. ilgs mill g-ii.g ill i il||.r||||| g.ri The Passing of the Family Factory 305 M M W Tt« • ■ 0^O00 ■ W M M^O tJ- fo w) « w w r-. wioo 'too w «5 Oi H W f0*O Tj-NIOMNO»OM 1^ 0000000 -o . M C MOOOOOOOOOOOOO woooofOHawno 00 M -«hTt H«D t- Vi-00 «TOM Oiw co«>- Oi 10 10 0> io« w ^ 0> CO o> s s «*5 ■* H m wjo No-^ooioTt-N COWM (O-^WJtOlOTj-Tj-O ■* ■* 000 O.N\o M Mt-.Ti-o »ow tow W W Tf 00 M M H M 1000 OOt^>HM^«MO >o>o ^« m W 10 lO W -it Ol« M CM Ol M t^ 00 O*O00 woo -d-OiMVOO OiOi Oit^OO t^oo CTCOOOOO **»rt 00 00 . ?*00 »OCO 10 TfVO ^ Oi t^ ^~^0 ro Oi *0 c*3*0 tOOO ICO 00 ■nOico»o t". Oi w t^ OiOO WTO t^W>0'0 Oi>0000 O c 00 ■*'0 wo -^t M ■* r ^'iJ'H M COWVO TfO in N r* m M oioo Oioo co hi '+ r~ o t~»OiN ^^O iOTi-POt~»rHnt*fo M lOWOO ri-iOWOO fO^O l»« CO Tf\0 00 o o to >ooo HO^OHvor-wO t^Oi&'^WiotOM OiOi^w CO 0*00 O 00 CM ^ to M >n*0 vo O O w t M O lOOQ O M 10 « ^o »o »o\0 ) fOO r^ Oi>0 C0>0 CO H Oi Oi 1^ J- 1^ tj-oo 0000 (OO OlO»OW00 00 t^-O 00 ^~oo ^ tooo »o r~ 00 t^ t^ t^ w loo O O »o HI t^ O f» 00 t^ »o -^ OfO'^cOOiHOO CTO O COCO'N'O w« (O CO W \0 »0 u \o »0\0 ^ M I- 00 r* -^ CO O; c- d! t^ CO w tF fo Tf 00 M CO CO - h- 1000 ^ r* CO to OnO Tf«0 M "O CO t^ CO vO -rf O W »0 t- M O 't CM r» o CM tC -if di oooO ct O 00 00 M t^ tOOO TO O ui tt liO W 00 mOiOiOO'WOOi ^^ (M to O" O 00 oio ';*;;0'^'i.'^'^ 91'^P,'^ O 00 o" -^ w rC o" CO dl 00" >o -"t -^ CO r~oo oOtOTfcoMW Hvo-q- « M W CO « WW t«.M H OO'OoO O-^Tt- Oi« O to COOO M^OOO Oioo 0*0 W H H H M e**0 H »o O O; <>; 000 '^ "^ "^I *C ^ M vO W od" *!? to & O w"'0 S H 00 -* O. r» ^00 ■<*■ r^ Ov ©■ O ^t t- coco COCO'* MIO ^ HtOCO H o o >o t^OO M r^ ^ H lOVO M W 00 11 Ol OiOO O W 10 »0 CO »o »o tOOO Oi»0 trt CO tOOO WJ CO (OO »O00 00 »o M too r* t^o < ■* fOOO w - 10 00 O >H 00 CO o o »ooo ooo »o CO oi fO>0>00 00 00 Olt^OO O HO WHWM MNW ^«M ^ Ol to ^O H W fO H cOOO « H Ol '+ >0 ^O coOiH t-*OcOM tO*OH CO OiOO 00 W l-l Ol H 00 OiOO Ol O Ol O *0 Ol Q OiOO O OiMOO Mt-MOO ThW r-f-ooooo t»-00O r~0 i-oo r^oooo t^oo r-000 r-ooooo t»ooooooo ■35 i^fl 3o6 Household Manufactures in the United States state provided for a decennial census/ the first being taken in 1825. For each of the years 1825, 1835, 1845, and 1855 household textile manufactures were included. Table XVI, based on the returns for each of the four years included therein, shows exactly what took place in each' county of the state during this period.' Table XVI tells its story so well that little comment is necessary. However, for the sake of emphasis, mention should be made of some of the outstanding facts, the first and the most impressive one being the great decrease in both total and per capita yards of textiles made in the home between 1825 and 1855. A decrease from 16,469,422 to 929,241 total yards and from 8.95 to 0.27 per capita yards is conclusive evidence that a great industrial revolu- tion was going on in this state during these years. That this revolution began in the towns and cities and finally spread to the country districts is evidenced by the fact that counties such as Kings, Queens, Orange, Westchester, Suffolk, Richmond, and Rockland gave up their household manufactures first. The enormous decrease, both in total and in per capita yards, between 1825 and 1835 was largely the result of the passing of the family factory from the urban districts. The tenacity with which the rural ' Census of 1865, N. Y., Introd., p. v. " The fact should be noted here that New York offered special encour- agements to family manufactures. In 1819 the legislature appropriated $10,000 a year for two years for the promotion of agriculture and family manufactures. This money was distributed among the counties to assist them in organizing agricultural societies, which ia turn offered premiums for family-made goods (Laws of N. Y., 40th Sess., c. 107). In 1820 the foregoing act was extended for a period of four years after the expiration fixed by the first law (ibid., 43d Sess., c. 97). The Passing oj the Family Factory 307 districts held on to the system is shown by the relatively small decrease in total yards between 1835 and 1845, the rather large per capita decrease during this decade being due to the increase in population. The all but total abandonment of the family factory even in the rural dis- tricts is demonstrated by what happened between 1845 and 1855. The great drop from 7,089,984 to 929,241 total yards demonstrates the fact that when the women decided to give up their time-honored home industry it did not take them long to do it. The explanation of what happened to the family factory in New York during the period covered by Table XVI is found in the general economic and industrial revolution which occurred during these years. The two phases of this revolution which were most closely related to the diminution of the amount of household manufactures' were the increase in transportation facihties and estab- lishments making articles from fibrous and textile sub- stances, the latter creating a market for the output of the ' In 1831 there were in New York 314 establishments making articles from fibrous and textile substances. This number had increased to 345 in 183s; to 463 in 1845; and to 889 in 1855. The value of the output of such factories increased from $5,463,891 in 183s to $19,643,028 in 1855 {Census of N. Y., 1835, recapitulation table; ibid., 1855, Introd., pp. S7, 60, 411). Along with this increase in fibrous and textile manufactures went a corresponding increase in transportation facilities. In 1832 there were but 17 miles of railroad in New York; in 1840 there were 394.50 miles; in 1850, 1,452,50 and in 1859, 2,643.75 (Dunbar, Hist, of Travel in Am., IV, 1,391). To supplement these railroads there were 995.94 miles of canals in 1840 as well as the numerous natural navigable waterways. Hence by i860 it was no longer a problem for the rural districts in New York to secure factory-made goods in exchange for the output of the farm, since the supply of goods was so adequate and the transportation facilities so ample. 3o8 Household Manufactures in the United States 3 o M o K Km. gB I >< n > O & CO '*-t^H\0 lOlOW3COt^COW WOO O O O^iO lOOO OO ^ oo eovo M M ^POv^^*^NC0 t-^r^H w m o t^^ <^ O M « d O O O w o o o d w o o O O O O H H o o « CO o o o o « 00 O O O O N « i-i o O r>-00 OvM^ O « lO'^fO nOOOOOOhnmO CO O M o o o t-t O -^ C^O -^^O M CO co^O -^ (N 0> 0\^ ro to »0 CS CO lO O»oo»"«i-i-i WOO low M oco O x^ ^\0 IH c* O H r^ CO w -^O*!-! w Tt-w OvtHonwvO O « O O •^O^'^O^O^O^ ^ lo dJ d" w' d" rC h" o" -^ rC iood"ocr rC hT di cT h" eTsd' oT vo CO t^-O H ■OM lor^O lOO woo co-^t^ O^oO w t^ Oi^co^H H O t^ coo M H t^\0 \0 w t^ M r^ *H coo cor^f^w w toiooo ^ w 0\ 0\ O^ CO ^00 r^ M H \OC0 ior^»OTi*tH^Tj-^w h" d* w*^ d^ h" rCvd" m'oo' « f^ O 0» i>- O\o0 O looo 0» t>» w CO O\00 0» H ■O ■^ • CO lO r^ w coo CI lO t^ ■ r^oO t— O^oo O tH r>.to -OnO^cowcoh^ O t^ ! O^OO ^ M vo to CO On 0\ . O ^* *0 0\ t^OO -^ lO .CO "O '^O lO W Ov ^ ■* ■^ t^vO ^\0 lO OOO cow lOt^W ■^t>>.io ^ ^ "^ Q. ^^ *^ ^ ^ ^ ^ c^ tC CO CO -^ rCvo"vo" w tC o. O0wcoc00>0\ OOOHOO OvV5io<^0»cO VOOCO'* CO w CO Ov Ox ^>- « 1-1 O. t-i OtO OO^ ^ !>■ 0_0^ ^ d> c^ i-T d" tC cT t^ lo O r^ CO M t^ CO lo ■* r*. w H W -^VO 10 0*^0 \0 t^ »0 CO lO CO -^ CO t^oO 00 t-* CO CO w CO O O co^H OvcoO fOOoOOO OO coO O m ^ P» « CO c^ ^io>oO\iOHi w 0\0\'i-CN.oco Oco toco -^O »ooo lOWO Os^ow ^w coo t»-iOH t»-O00 t^O\H w O V) tC d^ voco" l^ CO m" coo* rC^ioprd"tCiofrtC« ^M t^ M H lO'J-HO cowoo w N O^O OvO ■^ ^ CO CO lO w COOw ^OnO\co O^O^ ciH COO^W Ot^O w w WcON Ovw w m o^owooo o coon mwOWihioOnO*Ow ^ocT t^ w'^co" looo" lO w^ m" coco O^cot^co^ocOM OvO H CO M O w O Oi loco O rf wo lO O i>- w o «o M o coo o o H H W \0 tOOO Oi o" w" o'' t^ CO d* lO w o w o O\co w W ^ On « 00 W OnoO CO t^ W CO On W CO ■^ M W lOOO CO 0\ 0» On CO w lo O lO CO H M O Ti- ^ M lO HI W CO w" w O t^ O w lo O On On lO rf lo '^i; w^ CO O^ O; ON w" lO ■^o'* w" CO' WO O ^- CO t-t O OO IH w M O lO to w W O lOOO O f^ '^ t^ ■^ T? CO cT O r^ On w w O CO H lO Tf CO lO On lO t^NO^ cT dNocT i-T CO ^ CO O O w lO c* ;a :-d 3 ci42"§< : a S §SS§^;? The Passing of the Family Factory 309 CO vo 1000 M « OQ mOhoOO^wOvH ■ to H-CXD \0 O^ 10 - -^ i^ ■* . CO 0^ ■* • M H M ^ low M lOlOOOO H 1000 CX) M C^ t-* H J>-\0 CO "<^ O PO• O-OO j>.>0 10 -^ -^ 10^ 10 'i- ^f oo'^'O ro O H* ■ - COO\coioOt-^OOOHOt^co CT O^^Ht OOCNfO OiMt^H-OCOlOt^ to fO « c* "^O^O^'^'O iot^I>-C>i O •-• H 0\ rO W 0-00 Th O M 0\ .lOM*0 fO rC qJ o" CO m" tCoo" cT cT tF h" 10 Os'O 00 M H 'd-^O O H M W O OOOOs comvOOwcO'^co M (^ !>. WHO O; -^ Th ocT to d^ W 10 M tJ- r- 10 fO O CO o CO CO O^ w O CO (O w ^co" -^ a es O O^ w t^ w 1000 00 t^ to Tf On ■^ 0> J>; <> hT d^ o" O f^ CO w w CO w l>-CO 00 Tl-t^i>-t^Tfi>.ci 0*^^0»J>-w w H l>.H fow On 00 CO H (N i>.00 M 0> .00 o t^ w I CO M to to H CO W vo CO O) Oi CO to H O O w 00 00 IH w O t^ wtoioO^O"^^ CO On W O>00 Ht H C4 M ■^ to t^ Ov !>■ f^^„ onvcT On r-^o r^NO co •^ W O coo NO to ^ t^ On HI W M t-i t- o ■^00 to fO to O ^ M VO O On O O to O ■* ON CO -^00 >o ■^ CO w CO On O CO Ci . ■s «■•" *»• *j CO '=^%-§ OkJT3 00 .£ H^ M Co****** •fa- 65 ° "-> "■! S o.g iU ■§3 2 1 g I" I ,=;no ; rioo * S2S * O^ , o 3IO Household Manufactures in the United States farms as well as furnishing articles formerly made in the family, and the former furnishing both the agricul- turalist and the manufacturer a system for marketing the products of their labor, thus making it possible for the fanner and his family to devote their entire time to the ordinary farm and home work. WHAT HAPPENED IN THE COUNTRY AS A WHOLE There is no reason to believe that the diminution in the amount of manufacturing done in the households in New York during the period covered by Table XVI was not duplicated in the country as a whole. While the per capita value of such manufactures in i860 was one dollar or more in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, and Washington, yet, at the same time, there was a drop in the per capita value for the country as a whole from $1 . 70 in 1840 to $0. 78 in i860. What happened in each state during the period under consideration is shown by Table XVII. While this table proves the thesis defended in this chapter, namely, that between 1830 and i860 household manufactures ceased to be an important factor in the in- dustrial life and prosperity of the people as a whole, yet one needs a closer approach to the individual homes than is furnished by it in order to learn the details of the pass- ing of the family factory. Fortunately for this discussion these details are at hand; for, in collecting data for each of the censuses of 1840, 1850, and i860, statistics on the value of home- or family-made goods were included. The Passing of the Family Factory 311 Among the numerous questions the enumerators asked was one concerning the value of goods made in the family during the year ending with the date of the taking of the census. The accompanying elaborate table (XVIII) is based on the return from each county in existence at the taking of each of the foregoing censuses. It shows better than words can describe what happened to household manufactures in each county in the Union during the three decades just prior to i860. Before commenting on the significant facts exhibited in Tables XVII and XVIII something should be said of the states and territories not included in the latter. In i860 population statistics were returned from 19 counties in Oregon, 34 in Nebraska, 44 in Cahfornia, 64 in Miime- sota, II in New Mexico, 19 in Washington, 41 in Kansas, 17 in Utah, and 3 in Nevada. The number of counties reporting household manufactures in these states and territories in the order named was as follows: 10, 7, 11, 18, 6, 7, 18, 13, and i. Table XIX shows the per capita value of goods made in the families in these counties in i860. 312 Household Manufactures in the United States CO H B« EH o <: O M H o H O M o s 00 i o s, 00 H o M 1 3 o M o 00 H 3 3 3 (MOhmOOhOw o o o o fOMD vo u^ H 00 00 0\ w r>.\0 ^o lovo -o t-* lo iH w 0» w "-I OO »OCO ■* HO«OOOOOM H H O O O \0 i>-0 lOOO OMO N to Tj- lovO HI t>.\0 00 ^OMMMHH.M CO " H IH OiH coJ>-ioOco H N O t-*^r^ t^ 0\ O to tovo Oi CO (^ On ■<*• fO O ■^^ lO Tt t^>0 OOO l^O t^TJ-lOH OVCO t^. to en 00 O fOOO M to CO I^ M tOQO Ci Oi t^ ■* MlOOOf^'HlOOtOlHOW'O ^\0 oO'Oootopor^iH o^totoO I>.PI co-^C^O^OvO CO -^"O N vO CO 0\^0 CO "^ r-~ 0^0 O fO On to HI ■^(N too t--coJ^*iH lOvO . -^00 '^ t-- « P4 r- ooo O O^ <0 « O . ^ M O - O to ■O t^ CO CO VOVO OMO to CO CO M TtOO O M 00 O -^OO CO M tovO \0 N CO l-i Tl- ^ -( eO fO ro iH t^ O 'ct- r>. r* CO 10 10 N M O t^ »0 N CO ■-\0 Tl- O 00 00 O^owOmOOww'^-Omwo 6 6 d d H d d d d d d d d d \0 1'>H\0 ^W POM CO CO t^ ^ t^ O^OO 0 H'O W lOHvOCl N CO M CO o r--co CO t^ M loco ■^ H CO o« *^'^*^'^^^.*",^'^^^ OvvO O* M ■^0>'-(CO lot^^n 1000 10 t^'o' r^ 0\ o VIVO 00 lONvo r^ov^N o ■^00 O CO loco '^^ f^ o> o 10 100 « lOlOiOOvO lOiHOO w t^O^ O to CO W M t-^-O M CO 10 CO ^ 0*0 C» \0 00 x^ Ov t^ w eOOO t^ 1^ CO O O -^ »o 1000 00 0\ " 1000 ^00 ^ "O »0 ■^ CO cOiot^Ttt^p* O tI-N'O O ■^O O vO Th 10 CO^O H lOMOOOO O^lOtN-O to M CO r^^O CO M ^ OnO 10 o o o M ■<* VO M CO'O CO t-t \0 t^ CO ON H 00 \0 M o O ■^COCOO P< -^lOco '*'0 M fOVO oio" O" rO C^T'O' CO'O^ rCvo" cT rC co cT 10 0> 'I- M CO r^O O t^ CO iH CO CO'O 0\vO w 1000 r^« io^-ioO*ior-c* t^iococoONWvOoO O*ioc» M low o S o ^ *^"5 ki -Q * "S o S Efi SB « rsj Mi's tJT3^ SPO flJJ j.g 8.S-3 s-a H.g|-gS .8 S-S'" o K-2-9 G tSrtJSl ■o an g 35. a wln-SNttpa « „, a "'c djalS iH ® *• '^g O U d Id w<-> M an <.. ■11 00 '^-zi .S2.2-! _ ^'t; S S-3 S •2 °-S-s 25«-Ss- g ° g S § ! s.S'S-§--=a S S B 3«, S ass's 2 3 ■« S S " u 2 «■" S a 3 » §°o.SHg .5„=-§ ~a~.s .si.s>-BS «o.S .3-5 II a §■»§ "gg >'o 314 Household Manufactures in the United States r I s 1 o 1 1 H CO M 1 :2 1 H 1 1 ■ 1 3 QOOOOmOOO s 0000«Ot-iO O O ■<* *0 H ThO to -"d- ■* O 00 o o* 0» w O* O M coo « V) Ov vjvO O lo r* 0\ O* ^ O ^»oO rooO »0 O* 0» h oo w lo M lo eooo « f>. re ^00 \0 lO t^ 00 »0 ^00 t^wvo t^H « O fOPOfO ^ ^\0 lOOO M\0 0*1H M -*r^t>.M lO t>. M 0» 0*00 POOO vO O M to ^^ fO •^ V) lo lO rOO ^ O 0*0 ^\0 H « H O O O rt r>. CO »0 « H* lo hT CO fO w cT M CO M CO ^ N r* O CO O Oi « t^oO 00 lO O* I'iOO w OO o» O SO lO OvoO »o O* Th\o O* cooo" vcT ^^o" h'o' tC H lO H C4 M O 'O CO »o*0 t|- iO\0 ""i- M r*. t-» r-vo « N c^ ov q^ "^^ ^*^ ^ ^"^ Q. co^ pT cT CO d\o> t^vO H ir> rj- fo O ■* ^ Ov coeo CO t>- r^ t^ in t^ co^o 00 M M H r^\0 lo H 00 N ovoo t^ O* « c* looo O O o*o»»ot-*ioi-ro'i-r »OvO ^ « VO lO « CO t^ O^OO o» O^ «o O O M « 'd-t^M^OOOOO OvvO -^00 O Tj- Ov O Tt"M O O '*0\t^Ov lOVO O VO O QO ^ c*3 ^ eo ^vq^ M^oo^vq^oo^ oT d\ ■^ocToo' cT tC -.« t^ OVVO -^vo CO ^ Ov M CO CO H O O tOOO ^ MOO COQVO Ov« O [Sw3;^g;?f5^ The Passing of the Family Factory 315 00000 O O O O w tN. CO*© O* V) o o o» 0\ M •-i-00 t>.\o o H \0 O 01 CO V) o O^ 10 ^ H ?4 00 H H H 10 H \0 10 O VI 0\ lOO O ^ ^ r>.oo O WMCOWr^MMMOt*iwOWC*MHMOW MOO 0000 C* w cocot^ Oi'O ■^ t^ M co^O 00 CO « Oioo O^oo r^ThO^O^t^w « ^QvO^woo h m O^O 0*00 O OoO cow M (-.COO ^« cooo r* m 00 vo oO r^O\o toioov" H ^t^TfcoO^Ov-^O r-oo c* 00 *^*?.'^_ ^ '^ "^^^ *^ o_ Q. *^-°^ ^ Q; "^^ "^ "^^ ■* "^ "^ *" hT 10 o''od' CO cT CO N C< C* CO CO tooo « 00 m C9 V) t^ ci r^vo 00 to ■^00 On t^vo r* 0» t^ fO t>. CO t^ COOO 10 lO O O* 0^*0 CO w ^00 ■^ O 10 O^ cooo POOvt^t^i-i c^vO coco ^O »0 O vj ■^ Qv « t-» looO OnoO Qvcow ts.M coiH t-»Pi r^t^ioooo 00 HVO ^CO^^IH O « >OQ0 cOT^c^ coO '-' r^w cO MOO 0»to^« r^co« O MOO N-ooo O loco OinO 0» '^00 OvMOO coo O V)M W CI COM COM COCOM « ^ts.iOr^« OOOOO -^cOm coo ^0 M M 0» 10 O* H e» ^lOM-o p» ovx^^ot^ tN.00 t^ o>oo M ^ cfl \o M 0\0*^H 0\M t^O^O M\0 w t^co O-OO t^ to o» *"*"""'"''" Qyo tC hTvo^oo^ ■^ toocT^o" t^od'vo' COCOMC*^ TJ- M M *0 M ^M O MvOt^^^w lOvO Tj-oO tOOO M 10 O* CI 0000 lOtOCOW t-*O\-vO M CO <^ « t^ O^ M tN.00 to to tooO to to>o' ^ 000 coo O *-* cor*--^ cooo NO '^t^to^w o « M M CO HI * s ■a 3i6 Household Manufactures in the United States •s Y n 1 CM 1 o M ' 1 H 1 M 00 H 1 H 1 o 1 H 1 o o o o o o o o o o M CI O H M M ooooooooo ooooooooooo « O O H o o iH lo .\0 0\ . 0*00 vj ^ O^ ^O lO l>>.00 hco^OOhwcoi-iihOcowi-iwwn loO r^ Th O*^ 00 M O 0*00 r^M coO^lO^^^-t^O'O00 row OvOi O w ■ *o too -^\0 CO f^ ■ o ■* N \0 o .^ cooq H^O H CO HI 00 O CO ■^ f^ ■^ H 00 CO ■^ M r^ lo w vo ^ O; iH^ O^ r^oq^ lO ^ lO to iC W W C* H M w 00 0^ CO c^ 0*00 v> t^ « o* to ■<4* t^oo CO « lOVO C* 00 W \0 ^ 5 a "" Q I^O -^-^OO O w H vOvO O^COCOCOH t^ro 00 M vT) t^\r3 O cor^r^ rhO O CO iH rj- C4 M Th r^oo CO Oi CO H O CO CO t>.vO »0 to WvO'^O O^w MC* Ot^^ M c*\0 ^00\0 tot^^r^w o»0 't'O covo 00 « ^o toto^r^o t^ H^ N o *^^<-* *>• lOvQ 00 O* c» -d- hT ^ rC cTvo^ocT w" c5»oo" cT d\ t-T cT Th 0* O^vo COVO 00 M *o '!■% ll pll i I § II il !J g|l i s|^ The Passing of the Family Factory 317 li-)MHCOOrOOM«MM-^l-M ^ PO « c^ OOOOOmOOOOOOO 000 W-^hMt^H « MTJ-IOIO POO « to H t^ H ro hOOOOhOOOOOOO 000 ■^ CO 00 l>- *0 -«J-CO PO C7* « -* 10 O* 10 C^lOtHHOWMMMIHlHCiH w r^ ON o^ w 0*00 o ^n 1000 c> H ^ ■^ w t^ o CO « o *o po o^ x^oo ThOCO POOvo Ono\ \0 r^O ^wvo o) ror^-^PO^Oit^-^M r^vO ^00 H H woo 0*0 Tj-OO POPOO H rfio^^r>.woOoO "^CO Ov »0 Vj>0 ON \Ovo O iorft^0\000 P^fOH t^OkW 10 VO (O t^CO "^i-OO On 0» r^co W w O r^NO ^ O vioo to r^ coo cs e* -^ M 0-ONtoo O 00 ^>. H 1^00 r* 10 to H o M O O O^w Onw HOPOtO 00 OnO CO lOCI POON^r^-to o* « too O M 00 O PO ^^ PO rt- lo tooo to On On r*.00 O « -^ POO O POO o o r^ to On O .M PO« ^ 00 r^ONcopor^HO w ^to t>- O r^O»0»t^r^PO Onoo po *\ ^ *^°^ "^ '^ "^ ■^ o 00 o PO ■'d" t^ to W 10 !>• pOnO^ ncT 00 Th O r^ w 1000 N o O -< O ■d 3i8 Household Manufactures in the United States I pq 1 o 00 H 1 St o OO 1 1 1 o l-( a 00 1 H ! ! o o • o o o M o O O oooooooooooo o *o O COOO M H O t^^O H -tt fO »O00 • •* eO O* w On ■^ o o o o O o o OmOhO -OOOOOO O CO eot^ « « O t^ ^- w 00 ^ M 00 tH ^ O POH 00 00 t^ lOVO "O t^ ■* O t^ vn>. low W ^W OttH ^t^ ^00 ^ O O « O H O O O « w OwOmmOOOOhOm 00 o» «3 lO looo »o r* « 0\\0 «*5 O r«- O O Tf w ( t^irjCiO ioO*ioo*roO w ^*O00 r^oo m c*5 » OOVO t^O O^t^-^O^M w ^vO NO OOO 0*^M OvM t«.^ cooo O w ^Nior^-^w O POQO t^w w ^r^r^i>.io»o Tl- lo « t^oo CO t^vo t^H Otw t^w mo OvO ^O «w NcT w" hT tC tC ^ in ^ocT di o* « -^ tC po pootTvo* w'no vo in voh mm corOfOC* pocoeowwwww o.« e*3io« lO -^t fO r* ^ «^oO w ■*T^co^*^« POO fOW l^vo O^ VI H co«*0 w low Ot^f^ON ^00 00 1O00 O t^oO O ■^ ^*' lOoO row t^O^M t^coioi>.H ^r«-« O «00 t^O^O On vo On O ■* CO cT ro w r^ ^ (N rN.oo ««0 ro»OfOeOeOt^w •-• *OOn ioonOicoOnO « WOO r^-H-OvO H w H.1-1 lOf*- ^VO ION OOOWWNOfOPOM^WcO "^.VO 00 10 H^od" r}- tC cToo" 10 pToo" w'no' CO tC hT t-T *o CO M to W W NO CONO H ^ 10 O W W NO w O OnO O h ONWOOt^'* ^00 00 w O t^NO woo ^^*« locow poiow H NO t^N© CO O On lONO W 00 NO 10 O w *O00 w r^ ^ CO On t^ oT hT ^ w NO O lONO O «0 Onoo no Onw cow^Owt^w fOW W ^ ^ M OnnO cooo 10 t^NO 00 *0 1000 NO NO W O t^ ffJOO w^no O^ t^NQ^NO^ CO w Tj- CO t^NO NO O. eONO fO t^ O NO co *0 i-T fOcSca Tt CO -^ tC m" CO On Q'od" O ■* OnocT -"t On ^ ■1 ill ||i:ai lip 2 1.1 §1111 lit The Passing of the Family Factory 319 vO • 00 0* ■*<• Th N fO • H CO Q Tj-ch«oovo « H es.00 ao Ov 0>0-*-*« u^Mr^O»OM ; OOOwOOOOOOOOO 0* vivo Th H VO !>. »00 ^M W5»00 ffi to \n \o 'O t^t^ON li^vo «*5 OVO H P0»OM t>. t^ \ri 'rt H 00000000 OhOhhOOOOOOhO ^OW00O^O^H(^^0 tN.PON « por^r^t^ ^vo o^ *ovo H 0» *OVO to VO 10 -^ ■^00 VO wOOOOOhO MMOfOC^CtOHMHlOl-lO VOOOOO ^N POOviOO 000 t^^mcoO 10 Ovvo O tH O w 00 W b* w lo^ioo d w ov« lot^H ^*vo vo'vo" vcT o" t^ocT <^ 10 t^ m" iSi<>^ h" ^ 10 dvvd' «" rood coi-tMt>.^««vo MCOWrorOt-tWH^cO »ovo »o « O O Mioe*00.00 vOCO ■^M HOOOOCO M tN.fOO»« lo ■^ 9i ^ ^ ^« "^ O^ '^°^ O-. *^ ^^ ^ Q. ''^^ OvOO t^ ^ fO 'sf cotxT o" fO o^oo" lovcT cT ^do" tO'o"oo' PO tF m" h" fC rOHM10^.vo t^ M H fO O »O00 r^ O 00 O^OO Ov O t^O\t-*tj-0\Cfl OvtOcOt^viu^Ov O^oO O !>• t^ ^ O* t-t ^ 0.°^ "^ ^ Q, 9s 9,°*^ ^ Q.^^-.'^.s ^ *^ ^ "-, ^-.°^^ 9» 01 CO Ov t^ o" cT tCoo" CO CO dv O* t-T 10 cT rC o! h" h" cT iC ^ -^ W M 10 .OC»OoOvOiO Ovvo t^ '(f « « 1000 rj- M VO CO M •* lOvo 1000 w 10 t^ C^ J>.00 OOVOVO TflOCS lOMVO dv vcTod* 00 H* ov pTvo" dvco^'J'0"^o w tC H M WPOMtHHClHlO CO M VO CO Ov CO ■* Ov vj 0\ M ■^ « ? ■* c< ovvo Tt- H w COVO t^ H t^oo M -* 0* wi ■* t^VC) H ot ■^ vj CO VO H CO H fOOO t^ M Ov M « 10 CO CS -* ^vO Ov H CO P4 »ooo CO CO 10 Ov ■* M CO M « r* 10 CO H4 C» H Tf t^ CO 0,0 o b 8 a. ta S O ■ DO . , „ epOQua w O O O O 00000 »o VOOO O O 00 M CO CO O r-vo t^ H vo M M Ov t^ N O ^ CO CO Ov VO 00 O COOO Ovvo c« ^ w VO CO H ^ rf Ci cs to « t^ l>- C4 00 CO CO 10 O c« 1^ ■* O CO COVO H CO CO 10 w M H CO « t^ ^ OvoO CO r^ ^ (D ^ ci ^ 320 Household Manufactures in the United States PQ < i 00 00 DO 1 00 H o 00 H 00 I 1 00 M a 00 H 1 l-l i Q H On o H O o ^ to\o 1 8 o OOmOhOOw £ o o oooooooo H^ •0»Ncot^rt'iC«w«0» o o •HOOiOioOOiOTt-io ^° ;OOOOOOOi-iOO 10*0^0 ^POcow^r^H ^O ^^ 1 M C4 ONiHHWMeo^O*oO\ O OhOOOmOOhihO » r^^i^O 0\MVO^ HQOOO^ w t^^H low H ^r-*tH irjTh'^PO 00 ■* t^sO -^OO co\0 O 'i* 00 ■* OOM « cot^^O^^O\« « eOOO Oit-i\0 tOtOfOtOtOW « w w « •^ lO O* H ^ -^OO ovoo r^ M 00 vo OvvO QO O^ 0^0 « H lo ^\0 On to CO ^ M 00 f^OO O O « On On « « 1 r^ H (N««(NCOCONMWCI« HOC POO\« coON'^Th'd-ioO'O tM CO ^00 O ON O Tf CO « ^^ t^NO NO -^OO t^ lOOO ONQO *^ O '^ t^ CO 1 ^ lO On ^ tH H CM lONO NO t^ IH O 1 4r< Ww ro CO 0\ O W I>- H 0^ C* -^ m- IN PO fO W M ^ •* f Y 00 W COIONNO t^O t^"+ NO CN « r^NO r^ o w « NO ^ t^ 00 NC N?!; -tt t^ CO CO M^ ^00^ NO^ H^ 1/3 t^NO H On On CO €& H M C4 M M H ^*lo^oN^^>-loo coxot^co t^ ^ -r^POO W H 0\rO'^N\0 « ■* C ^fO00 OOOvCT'O P»^0 Hvo ^ NO ^ 1 0\ PO M l^ 0»0 *0 00 « 0^ « C) H CO M ^ !; B ; k ^ * \ c-H . :^§ ( s c udso ante erce iddl onm orrii issai lem mer ssex arre fi c 3S: JWIS it IS IS (i a c^ ,^ MO-* d d d ^ *-* lO O OMH CO t-vo H CO (O 00 ^- O* H O "J r>-oo *o H CO VJ MIziM The Passing of the Family Factory 321 N ■ OvOO'HCO O'CO POOO 10 ThO rhOO CO CO O w O^ 0^*0 w M ro<0*00 wvo O^fO TfOO O O t^ ONcot^N o T^co.l-».IH 10 Ht^ ONHOOThHH'^ Os ^ PO O CO 00 00 *o ■^ to O* O H M PO r- 10 o H po po tI-oo r^^HiO NH o^oiotJ- O^OO H TJ-O^O POOCOOO 100 O PON O^M lO POOO ON 10 POO ^ M PO O ^CO POCO O H w PO CO <>* *0 On PO H "^ M C* 00 lOCO O 00 coo PO-^O t>.PO^>H ■^ -^00 H O M OnOnO ■^"^c^oooo 00 iH M t^o r^ PO »o 10 ^ t^ OOO Th-^POt^M TfH tJ-OO O n.OO 10 "^ -rf 10 ri- ^ CO 10 POod" ^00" T? Tf On hT rC OnOO ^ cTco" ^ 10 lONO" W O C i^ a 5 5 3 • . ii !3J3o^- • -«i"-T3 gO^^ti :^ < < m u o o u u P fa ffl W ^ P^ c c« w H 1"^ MS fi Eg en 1-1 nj O 3 S aji a — D,"*^g rt.*i**cn o 03 R o 0°° n ■si 5^"^- 1-9 03^ T ti ow'a^ : ■H'?e-<"i ■ ggUo'S>. SoO R'O— O iS «W ..3 t g a>T3 w d „ «5 a "/r 3 .S"*^oo -re3.« « o - 8 > o .as g a <3 o g " S s S.'S u«>giJM-9 w O, - *j ■ 322 Household Manufactures in the United States I n I o 00 H a CO M OO M i 1 o M 00 H 1 1 1 o NO 00 H o 1 J n CO t^QO « 00 m t^ t>.VO -- 00 00 lO O "O « Ov 0 vO H t^t^Ot^w «0 lO lO r^ 0« 0*0 Ov Tf CO t^ 6% H H w H (O W M •* o (N M M O M o « o C H 00 IH r^O 00 Tt low On OVO ^ H \0 O O r* c* too CO t^ Ov ■* « io\o t^ O* eo ^ t^ /> lO H c< 0>*0 00 lOO " ^On(n O t^^OHHvOVO to 00 W \0 •* ^ ^ r*\0 « M 0» On O H « ONNO O t^ « ^\0 lovo t^ i^ r^ r<.\o O »o »o o* ^oo w o^ m ^O^ -^ O^ h o^ ocT'o'vo" d'eot^co^ocTi-r^io'* loocT'o'ocr lo "I* d* t^ cT MM MMC» NWW tHH «M MW M O OiOO OnQnO O woo Cfl ^^^^0^ lOvO O »0 Ov « « OnO m I^OnH woo i>.0 H ioOncOOn^ioO v>00 »000 00 00 lO l^vo vO ThO r-ONW OoOoO « « ^c^On"4'«OW t^iOcoOvW ^co-^M '^■^loro co^O cooO v> co t^ i>- w VO •^I'OnO'OOO O cow On lOOO vO "O co O CO •* lOOO cO co On w ^ w r>."^w O O t^ t^ l~>- ^ ^00 no com t>.ON^iOON O On 1:^ CO »ONO CO w Onvo ioOnco^^h OoO t^voH coco On O O CONG ■* «ONO NO W • VO OnioOnCOW n w CO lO • H H-ioH r^O low W NO ■ W On ^ ^ lOvO t^ ON lO *C . €^ 1/5 ^00 H M O On t^ T^-eoi-i ioOnQ t-t t^ r^ioio-^w H onw cT cT -^Qo" w" cT ^ w Qvovow ^O Ow OO Onw OncOWO) OnCO^ 0\nO H O OO lOOO M vO lO H t^NO M -^ lOOO W On O NO H VO O t^ W^ *^°0. On eO PO -^ ^°°«. ^°0 "- ^ O- '^- "^^ ^ "^ "_ '^ *^ CO CON© CO ^ CO O lo lo t^ WCO HMHHIO IHH ON«00 M Tt'd-iOW ior>.ONO w OvO co^^oniocoOn T3 3?i3 1 O rt^ X . D a w te S 8|||| ll^-HS si ill lI'S'S^lJ' The Passing of the Family Factory 323 gS- : Ot^.coO -*o H r^T*-«N r^Tifo «oo W30 c» 00 coOt^O»M ooO Tfo* « w ■ MOHPOWHMOcOWHeONl-IHrhNHWNOHOOOOMO l>- coo C^ 10 Tj- H \ri\o M rj-w OoOl^cot^ -^CO Tj-r^ioO O O Ovipoh 0»OiO« WOO rO0<-t(NC1MH0cOHHHCOV)MCOH0.vO POOO vO co^O VO «1H N'^O POW^OO^O t^QO lO O 00 H VO 0\ OvO CO O Oi to lO On ^oO ioioioh .« k ovo 0\>-i Q t^OtfOiOW r^ ^ '^ '^ ^"^ '^ ^ "^ "^ Q, '''OO 0»vo « N o co»oO\«oo r^O H O* t^ lo H co vj Qv o »o 6" w hT lOQcT Q o vo'o" d" d'ocT «" »nvd'^ cot^dItoM'cro'»o -^o" o^vcT CO MMCl IHWH (HM M -coo>w »o iH 00 O 00 vo to looo coi>-t^c>) iot>».r^ior» inioM r* t^ t-i, »o es^vq^oq^ 9; 'tl "^ 't *^ ^ *^ *^*^ Q. ^"^^ ^ Qs '^-. *^ *^ ^°^ "^ O co co co o^ o^ »o ^ o" o" o" (0*0* ON i^ tovcT o" o"'o'" o''^»o»o'^»odlM' coocT d\ "^ »o »o d* »o O^QO "O 0*0 r^-'^cow N « f^ioO I^iocivo-O lOOO c>i 0\*0 VI w On e^ t^ C( r^ 0\i00 O t^O\c^ lOM cOThO HVOOO On cO^O fO O^O « "O r^ CO c^ t^oo NO NO c< CO to J>- CO COOO Oi 'i-OO 00 N cor^«>-ONO Ct roO^Ot OsNO NO O CO On r^ O V^OO On ^^M t^ioO^O cOH looO « CO ON CO O VO ^NO On « t-oQ nO to « oo O u^fOH00 O l-^toONO Oni^On^c^ cot^ »ooo looo ^cor>.ON«oO v»ui lOOO CO t^ "O CO t^ c^^ OnnO no ^vO^ h -i- On I^no cs 00 O lo co h OO conO cO " lONo" i-T rC i-T cT «" to O lO O On O o' lO HnO r^iOiOH OnO -^Th^ Tj-NO COHVO OnIOCOCOCOcoc^ ^no CO m p« rht^-^OOO vjcol^t^ONO « c* POTfThcot^ON ^nq ^00 ^ ^ ^>. -^ co lONO H t^OoO '^**^"„'^ ^ covj O^NO^ ONOO NO On c^ -^ J>-00 »o ionO lO ^ ior?co^coo'"o"t^i-< ONiod* cToo" t^ tF t-T lo '^ tC h" lood" pT ^ »o M NMMMCO WC^MOICH OCOMNW W MH OO 00 O r>. t^oO NO t^\0 r^ C^ ^oooo eow"i>.ioi-riCHrcrd>^ cooo" co cT lood" o *■* C»H covO MCS mhmmocsmOnomm^ MH CO 1- o 324 Household Manufactures in the United States I I— I h-t H 4> 3 M 1 1 5 00 H 1 1 3 1 M 1 c 3 5 t-*00 CO t^ CO M !>. o « t^oo o v^ « to ^ N o»oo o* *2^ to o *0 w io\o O N o coi^^*^'^ io^>-000 t^iO'^^ M H «■ d H d M M d d d M ■^d H H d d d d vO Oi COO t>-CiO t^ M r^ CO H 10 coco CO VO .\0 CO ^ - Ov ^ H N coiOM a>.OvH eoH tow ^0 -*'* M CO M M CO W M H ■* H H CO CO H M O H c^ OvoO M\0 ^co^^^cOH\0 Ov ^00 t>. t^ « CO 10 CO »0 CO ON CO O O t^OO loOvt^ONONiHVO ^lOH C00\i-i »ow^O^ChOvl>;COt;; ^00^ Ov H_ O^ O^oq^ CO O^ ^'^„ ^'^ O^ 00* 10 m" tC ■■i^vd'od^ m" m^oo" c^*" dv t^ p"*©" ^ CO d' d* CO CO CO H C^ c^ M H Ovoo t^H O iH 'ij-OvtN HOO Ov^O <^^ -^l-^^Ovrs. cooo r^QvO cotN Ov^r>.OvcococOM cotN OvCO O ^O *O00 ^O t^t^cs QvOvO vjOvo com 10 t^vO CJ cocON co^oei t^ 00^ ^ d^ d^ covcT'o"" pT m" dv o" t^vo" d* ^ ^ w" d'cxT co cT pT 0000 H H OncoO w ior^t>«-f^cfl ^co«oo « V5co»or>. low ^100 cOONcoioO cot^^c^ CO OvvQ « O »0 OvoO wvo -^H CO^CO ThO i-t o^^^■ii■t^c* coco^-^w !>.« d» ^ocTocT ^ lo ^ d' t-roo''vo'"vd* tC d" c^ ^ rCoo' iC ^ d^ «" « c* O -^vO c-* ^vO OOCOoON « O O ^^lO<^^ O »O00 O covO O M CO -^ t^ f^ O lovo cs O t^ioclOO Ht Ovco^OviOM t^t^QxM -^W OvtN M MVOVO CO -^OO tM « CO « M 00 O M lOO O w coQ !-< t^OvwvOt^co'^'NvooO hvO t-t *-* r^vO VO O O OvO t-^X^t^coOvOl O Ov^O t>-W ^00 vowOI^coOQvwcoOhmO'^woOn -^oO « Qi Ov VO COOO 00 COOO t^ '«i-cO Hod'hTioio^tCtCpocoprioco WMHWM HiCO M COM MCOM MH H ^ t^ M tJ-VO H VO 0\ M Tj- e» i O VO ^ CO ^ O O ioOvOviocOtJ-c«j tI-00 COOO vO ^ H lOlOt^M O COM w lovo -^ »o CO^O tovq^ r^i>.ioc*\0 o) t^Ovo moo »oO\ CO t^ tCo" ■^ d" m" dv rC ^No" lo tF lo '^ cOMC* wMco eoo*w M sg^g = g| ■d ass Eh C G ^H S OJ C C M £ The Passing of the Family Factory 325 10 • OMH«HCOMHOOOON«OOOtOO«"NOl-lO Ov i>- H w t^M c^O»0»r>- too "O CO ro"0 r^Ow cocom 010 »o\o W oioO »oO» 1000 -0^iow o» CO cooo ^ 10 r^ ^ o^oo ooow^."o6" c*' b cd' d\'0 c«i' cood' CO ►-Tod'oo' rC 10 ^oo'vcToo' tC co cT w" cocxT cT Tj- CO'O CO vo t^vO r^ O Ov vovO CO 00 00 rv.\0 Ov OnoO CO W 00 t>- vo Tj- Ov OsOO « VOO cOOn'^coO^ O O O^O^O-t^O iOO^«o hi -^oO ■^■^'^O^'-i (n\0»0 O 0\0 Tj-co^O O^OO r^r>.iOH J>.co vjm'O h « c^.-^-^O « 0*00 t^ m vo" CO CO r^ rCotTocr o" cC d\ ioc* ^\0 ONiO^iOOiOO t^iOOTj-'<*00 COCO « V) cOHiO HI N HI lOM 0^cO't0^c^ ci\o>ot^ -^OO co O ^'O O^OO ^j- t>. O M es c< W iOiOt-»O^r^C0lH HI O O^COO< O^OO OiHH0 'O COt^O^O '^O w t-^ cOOO t^^O OO HiOOvOO MOO ^ O ^ »O00 to (O >0 HI TJ- 0*0 0» O^ co^O vj O ^cT d^ CO -^ w" tFoo" o" i-T cT cT ^ cT o" rC CO h" CO CO c^ o^o" c^'"co' MHCOH WM HH lOMC*rO«-« O cor-r-c^ too-o O noo m w loco^c^tor^w « Ooo hoo ^O 10 O* 0» 10 CO CO COVO 000»\00 0^*0 tJ-\0 w 0^*0 m 00 O f^ O^00 »OhioO f^HOO CS « CO »ooo 000 O H r-MOO io« o^ooo x>- o w o*c>*ooooo -^O lO^O w so O CO CO CO O O O ^O e* « O 0» O vo vo ^vO ^O^O O^OO vicO"*^c» hoO lOl^coOv lot^w lotot^Tj-ioO^ coo OvtO a & ^'' U £ % M •00 cooo - lovO CO OOOM W H H - HI « CO 0\ M 00 CO 00 vo PO'O M VO H t^co Ov CO '^CO OOOM fO M (H C^ M « 00 c^ o-o Tj- Tl- co\0 ■ « li") ov-O ■*vO ^ • « « Ov • H H H l-l ■ d W lO IN H « CO ■ vOioco^oO r^cn o w «\o xoOv l>.iOfOt>'W M TJ-rJ- O>00 't O •+ O 10 w M o^\n -^ t^oo en o fO 0\ vcToo'no' o" dv'O'vo' h'vo'oo" h" n" ■^ w Tf* 0< O N 00 ^^"0 H «f-*w H Ti- ^ d M o,\o ^ o o 0> fO t^ ioco"«" h"\o'\o' to h" foc.\0 CO -^ w O H cooo t^ tH O lo 10 O ^ "<*-(N woo O cO^or^fO 10 cT M^ tC-o" d' 'f «^ Ht CI M Ol so 00 O VO PO O to o 00 Tj- H 00 CO OvVO 10 « 10 CO C>. ^ H 000 •^O'OVO ONCO'^^t^OcO cT tCirJ 10 c^'oo' tC m" hT rC coco' CO O M (OQO 10 6 H 10 W M ■* CO ■<^ co^ CO w fOvO H H t^ . 10 10 r^vO en r^ O^ 't "-. ^^ 10 *>• « w OV H ^00 t^vo CO r^ ■^ Tj- r^ CO t^ w M o 00 O »ooo r^ CO cooo M o CO i^ CO H fN. 10 CN CO O 0\ •^ o So CO « N « •'^ V The Passing of the Family Factory 327 l^ vO 10 5> HI 1-1 IH CI 0*00 ro »o o>^ lo 100 o* r^ r^ t^ ■* 10 -^ to w M )H ? -4- M VO H M w N « in IH H H PO ro W H IH M M « C) M ■* 000 5?^ 10 r^ ? IH t-- tJ- 100 00 fO O* r>. r^co I^ I>-00 •* O^^ H M 00 Ht -"^ t^ 000 CO ON vo H CO to t^ IH 'O c/3 ■<*■ N JTO ^ r^\0 tOVO 10 M -O Cl r^OO On »0 m rj- -^nO ^>■ tO'O m-O CI H 0\ O »0 CO tJ- -d-OO IH O vO tJ- Oi\0 no IH O OnCO r^O -"^OnN lOThO ON ■^'O « mcoM c» M Mooiow CO -^No Tj-r^fOH TfcoOvQ -^oo hTocT cT On o" loco" no" On oIno'co'no'no' tCNQ OtT »0 tC ■^^oo" ro t^ o" ^ lO t^Cl V3C1 (^OnOnOnOniO^On On'O \0 O nO -^ On COnO On On ^ O* Th ■o !>. « i>- Th "^ tONO Thco f>-00HroNNOiH00MtNiTtH moo ^>■ t^w Tj-c~.r^o onm ■^coh On t^^o « tooo low r^^WNO i^ioO On ^^ fO r^ Onvo'vo" looo" coo'iO'^o'r^iorCcot^ hT 00" M'ys' Onno" t^ W iO'«:tO'ONCOM row r^O MOO *+ fONO Tt«oO O M t^ioioiom W NO 00 0> lOVO ON On tJ- W On Tl" cOOO O O t^oO O 00 nO H On t>-0 t^ O C) O I^ CI NO voO N tJ-^O On -^ C) P^no iom t^ONWOO lOMOO On OO m O m On ionO 'sj'NO tO'O CO fO ViO Tf" r«- ► lO O 00 00 NO ONNO ■* CO ON tJ- OnoO O lotofOr^Tt-cioo OOO O coONt^mc* loOO OnO « On O t^ On HI co rJ-OO O -^ rO ^ OnnO ONTfiH OnioNIOO O cOOn O j>. O H* 00 O r»-NO O^OnO O hiu->0 mO O Onco lo r^ '^ po tO lo t^oO Mno t^r^ONO rO^t*~0 tONO CO "^ lO cooO HOOfO lOM HNlHNOOOCt C1HINC4C* coo « HCOnO OnOn inO ^ lONO H O ^00 lO in On lO CO M rhO r^ N C* M On OnoO lO-^W OOOnOoO t^coH'^fOONrO'^iHNO OnO W w On CO lONO lO HI 00 ■* COOO to OnnO ^O O fO ■^ ■*00 O c^ cO m ci Q \0 00 CO ^ « N HI r- voNO 1>- HI CO O ** OnOO m f^OO N l-^ H CO ^NO O^NO On CO On On ■^ conO fC c^" tC coocTno" CO CO CO rCoo" o" rC cooo" M MCOMWMC) WC* C^ XI a -T3 " o I.. npQ y,^«Jgj3B4JM!>H>cjC'c?'C^'7?4'dVCl43iSlt3^ a'g^at:Sc320^Sac>>: o, m g a g Sj ^ ^ & 33rttadSjSrdj:^Oi;33rtrtST3gdijk,artd MMUUOOOOOOOOUPQQMfnOOOOaa M M W 0.2 M .OO O O J* « • J iJ" ■ T3 .-^ 2«2 lil^^^ a S --S S o •a c jju a«» 5 w- .«! > Ea'7p«» g« -»3 ' « - 8 S* & X n 1 CO 1 1 H 00 M 1 i 00 M H i 1 M S ■ 000 « - ■^'O CO O* l^ M M M ■^ 0\ *M M o»»o M o\ t^ ^ to t^ fO CO CO W « w CO M HI « M M M C» C< H 00 ^ w ^-\0 O O tn^io^0\l>-t^0\«'O t^OOO w o tJ-O PO^iococ^ 0\0 O^t^^c^00 N t^to^^co«00 ■--<*-n w HOO»OcoiOO w M rN. 10 ^ CO M (N CO w ■^00 O w t^ ■* 100 POOO w> to COOO O^ 00 HVO t^t^OOO t^cocO 0*00 COVO sO COC^ O 0»cOt*-<0 vcToo' r^ ^ CO 10 rC rCvcTod" covcT d^ O* rC rood" t^ocT tC o" co 0\ -^OO »0»t0to0 O\t^fOO00 ^»N On r^O ^^O O VD « 00 V)00 0» ■^ O 'O yS CO t^OO 00 '^HVO " ^^M -"^OsO 10 t^vo" 10 o" "^ t^ >0 -^ tCoo" O*^ t^ ^ CO CO t^ -^00* t^ 6^ M v. CO H M oOO Oit^coO O t^« io« O^coc^ r>.^^w m O 1000 vO Oi r^ t^ c^ O COOO M O^oo vo ■^ ^ O^ ^ ^ t^OO C^ -^00 t^ O^ H H VO 'O 0»*0 CO I'J t^ to o M 00 ^ CO 1000 OvW r^iOTfwvO ^t^co^W lot^Ov^ tJ- t^ CO fO^O "o r^>o CO O CH ■*!• »0 -"i- cooo "O O w w O »0 Oivo c^-« ooo h t^ci eo 00 »oci 000 0\0*ior^O*cocN -"too * t^ CO i>-co \o t^ 1-t C» H ■ H M CI ■^C^HMOOWCOO \0 M lOvO ^ H vo O O -=1-00 lO^O ■^ ^00 (M 00 VO 10 O O lOvO CO COCO ) On r^O COOnco^hnhic^O'OhOv vooO ^n CTi cTocT o" CO cT oi cTvo" 10 tF w" cT ''i^ o" n" 10 On t~>- f>- c^ t^co lot^l^c^ ci lOVjl^ -"J-vO 0*00 M \o c* lovo t^ M 00 ^co o 10 o '-' c4hOwoOmc»io r>.oo On ^oo Onoo co r^ coco "O O M vO On •?!■ vocO N t^oo »0 cO tJ-hcommc^^ihCi cow mco^ NO 00 00 ■^00 NO lONO r^ H 00 10 ON coco On NO -^ '^ w 1000 Pf c^ fOOQ M CI c* ON rf t^ coO coc^no -^OiC) O coc^ OiiHOO w c^ iCscT iC CO rC cONcTno" O^ncT tC tC m NO On ^ «WCO«COCOC11H^ IOMC4WNONO CO w On « 00 M «N O 00 O00 M r-. o O O CO CO -^NO CO 00 O H CO HI -^ H r^ 10 On t^ OnnO ■* CO ■^ ■^ f^NO t~* \0 00 NO H NO »0 CO 00 CO t^ f- »o M NO^ O^ 0_^ CO ^ tCvo" cT tC t-T o* COOO e^ M M tJ- lo CO O On VO f»» On ^ On O* O !>. l>.NO NO t^ ^ hT NO^ ■^ 0" tC c{" t~>iOO w HI M C^ 00 "sj- ■* o o »o "«t ■^CO NO (N \o w -^NO r^ CI 10 Xi a ^ V jij^ ■St|? ••35 * ^■<» ■ •» a « »■?"§ < u h5 o^«»— NO ' •o - so 00 " " a" " s > a >".3 > '^a s. ...» s a"'n■ "E M -- ^-^:3 . as "?»<■§ o!2 -« '^ » ^;j:o : rtnji '• ■ ■ u ' M w CO (O ^'J t^^ . H lO N W vO t^oO 0> O -^ Os'O O^ ^* Oi 0» lO Oi M to H -O oo M O O^O oo Ov^Ot^OvcOt^ONCOO i-i ^O cocO O CO 0» COOO H tOOO O* O t^OO low -^COCOO CO O»00 VO ^ lO O to O « ^ r^'O vO cooo i>-0 r>.0*eow ^cOO O M *^co Ov O COO O ^ .0 '^O OiiOcoO w loc^ M O C0"0 00 « "O O Ov CO'O ^vO 00 Ovoit^WNXOOiO m oo w low r^Hvo ^O ^OscoN woo OOO ^00 i>- co w ■* O O O OO O 00 -"^l- c^vo \o O «N O ■* CO lo loo o Ooo ^Tj-cor^O\woooo t^»oo lO-O CO t-^oo O Th CO lo o O H cooo cocot^w t^ioHOO cO ^00 ONt^w toioo»ior^O cooo t^ioco^t^O^Tfio^ON cq^ ^ "«°'i ^ ^^ ^ ^ ".. ^^ ^ ^ Q, "^^^^^ "^ "^p, '^^^^'^ '^ ** Tj-co ^-o o coocTo" tC dl lo d'oo'oo' d^'o'vcT «" hT tCvo* HWWM cow wiowcoww lO t^-io-^ww w s-^' ?>-^ g ; I b ■a O O fi H fn O O W W i-lJ hJ § § 12; O (5 « CO CO t> The Passing of the Family Factory 331 COvo OCOvo OTt-co 0*0000 fOO Htio vooovo « CON H i-^-^Tj-inH io\o po r^ OMo -<;h On 't \0 0**0 M 0» 10 lOvO 0*00 '^t^ci wioo w^H ro "OOOONOH MtHOMOtHOl-IOlOOtNOMHOOt-IWOH ONM- M HCi «ioOvO'^iH»oO ON HtOOTt-N OM OOn 0\ fO lo iH t^ .oo Oi»or».M Ti-ioioloO >H 1010 fO IH 000 W fOf^COO N CI C»H M M TJ-COHtO'N OWfOW « O 1000 M 1000 »OioO H >-< -^lOrOMOO N O cOpOOnh Th>0 O OO ci o w ^ 10 pooO -^ On w OnO « O'OH Tl-^tOO*t^H O N M woo f^vo O 000 O w t^ ^ O O m - ^ ^ On^O -^ »o t^vo 1000 HI 10 t^ h CO M W M Tf- H TJ- t>. to M r>.oo NO -^ O *o t^ 10 OnOoO OntJ-O OoO OnM r^O lOH O ONfOH 10*^0 woo Mvo ^ONr^ON>o ■^N ■^O^N OOOOM CO^OO H 00 H tJ-nO POOO 00 nQ N O tJ-nO lO t^ Q O 0*l-f HNO ^POH ^-i-i t^ O^ On ^OO. 't^ '^ O" -^ t^ food" *0 On ONOONt^OHOOcor^ONHO'*N -cow^Ot^co r»-Mr— r^HOfWcoONf^wNOc^ooO ■ iono cono O iOP0000(MM\O^«Ttt^j>.t^«iO •lOO'^cOO noi^oni^mocoiomioon^coc^co "cot^i-T cTocT HCfHH NMU^MWMMWCOCO. N«CO CO '<*■ O N lOOO lO-^O M lOCNl M POtOCOC< t^O lONO ■^ '^ CO CO M HI ON»OCO^r^C* ^ r^NO CO On cono conO « O OOO ^r>.t^ON W « HI t^vO ^ O 00 P» lO ^ On 1>;N0^ ^ *^ *^ -^00 tO W t^ tJ- -^ TfoNC^^'JtCcoOOcO CO H H CO Hi HI « •sills =3 Ti D* O ^6. t o S HJ •s,« BPPMmmOOOOOOUOOOUOQQOPHHW 332 Household Manufactures in the United States I n i H o M 1 M i M o M 1 1 1 o l-t 00 M H C I I>- OvTt- O Ov r^ CO O ''to « ostx) \O00O«t^0 TfM 00» O^^ VO x>. CO i>;.co^\o^ o\ o\ CO 0_ *^oo^ i>;0^vo^vq^ •^ ^ "^ ^ "^^ ^ ■* O CO O coco r>. w^ cooo w cOO O ^oo vO H ■^ CI O vO oo i CO ^ CO H CO 00 H ^\0 ^vO pOOnh O^OvOvO t^io O*^© ^OC^O■^t-^lo0^co C>"0 HOOW t-t ■^^lOirjO hio MCO COO OnOvO t>-iococs low CON H tovO 00 W •* Ov "O 00 to covO 00 O^OO "O O\co*^t^0 lOH c» O »0»0 « 00 looIoTioM^o'^tCt^dscoiOM'ol cTco" i-T eC o" ^ ^ t^ ^ t^ M H O O^ f^CO HCO v>o t^O *^0 ■^I>.'*rt'"4-V}0 H lOOO lOH W r^Cfl -"^O lOt^H Oi t^\0 Ov CO lO M 00 CO en t^ O VO « M covO 00 w Tt COOO VO CO C^ 1-1 VO »0 *0 o*vo CO HPo-^dviH'criH'^ i-Tvo" ^ o" cTvcT cT ^ *o W « rJ-COCOCO MM MW MCf W VO t^ C^ - t^ in O O co^cocorfwOO lovo vO co^ HI O O^0 r^cON lOCO Ovt^O^-^H H coi^^-^H Ov^^O lO lO On CO C^ w r^ COVO M o* t^ en lO H Ovco 00 « O O oo MOONii^OlOOO ■^ CO lO t^oo CO c^ Cfl _ ^O C^ to W (M H « W M O co^ VO « oo H TtoO O VO O ^- O O OvCO 00 t^ cs" cT lo m" lO cT ih'vo C4 C4 C4 M HI H^<^cacdc^(L>H bj s.-s.g The Passing of the Family Factory 2>2>i loco • O to ro t^ lovo OCO to O ■Owr^O\OWMt>»Oi-i H H «»0 OvO w w OO rOMOOOOt^vj 0*0 M TfcOfOW o t^.^tO'^ •0^'*4''NO*oco«t^ 00 . (M ^"O t^o to M lO tN lO O 00 c^oo io-^tor^0^ioo H\0'0'000 lOM fON Ono 0^00 Ov to M so 00 10>0 tOH H lOtOO^H toOO O^tOl^^O ^t^ '^ IN CO H r^ t^OO OnU^O tOH C4 O 0\*o0 ^ t^OO t^OO O 00 « oo ^ ^^^ ^ o" t^ «" H O W lO t^ O O "O t>. w -O CO iO\0 M lOcOr^'^cOOscoO tn M r^ lOOO 0» to Q w (H ^^(O^^*OO^0^ lO-^J-tHSO ■^ co^o so 'O t^ 10*0 H" ^o o» >h 00 o so « «sO XOIOWSO 10 ^sO OsM Os« ■<:ftO. 10 COOO to c^ so "^00 t^OO CO »0 to O 00 es to CO O so Os 'i-OO O 00 sO l-i C^ cot^H Osco-^C^OO vcT 00 dl CO rCtxT o ^ocT co H MO) « « 1-1 vO'«i-QOt^O'*cO Osts) O coiOCOco»0 c* M t^t^Doo r^i^ 0:^.2.S b "ti W) »-J o-*-»+j'g ■-^ss^ll^^ B3 a 334 Household Manufactures in the United States ? > m > 1 1 H o 1 1 00 H CO M 00 1 1 o H o H CO H < I (N. O* »0 lO M ^ H HOO M lO CO « TfOOOO t^ CO ■* « 5° CO H M M O H e< M O t^ ^00 Tj* H 00 lO CO ^ O 10 CO -^ 1 H M CO H O loO 0) w M M n M 0\ VJ VI W rt- CO t^oO ? IN H VO O* O On t^ ■* H 00 o»o 1 « CO ^ M CO O O Td- l-t COO ^ ^ • coo H IT M «©> « v^O r^ H M W W H CO « I>i t^ « vo rj- looO CO 10 H CO Tl-OO 1 CO V) ■* O H On CO On ■* 0) y-) ON - H O lOOO . CO 10 o" ^ 10 i-T cC O t^ 10 CO t^NO O 10 tH VO M Ov 10 H '■i-'O w o »0 O -^OO "O On 00 r^"0 O M O « O On v^ ■^ CO « CO M ^ lOOO 00 O On OS N CO On vjnO conO hi . CO TfyD ^^ O tH H ■^ t^OO -^ O POmOOO « H tOH WQOO'O to »0 ■- Th O !>* cO-*(MOPOO'■ O^ O* -^\o \0 Tj- O cooo CO tHo Tf CO CO w cq 0\ C^ ^ cooo O^ lO CO -^ Ci IN M CO H O co« ^OOOVi t-^oO CO « lo •<4- r^\0 O O tO-O M \0 CO 0» CO l>- lo ^ w vO -^vo o lOO^iocoOoO l^H OO wt^Pi HI CI ^h OO CI ^*\0 O*0hc^\o^hiO\ ■eJ-00 oO On O ^ »0\0 oO O O* ■* co \0 00 VO OnVO O lOOO HI O O W lOvO ^-^C^W r^iOM t^ 10\0 CO ^*. ^ ^ "- "^ "^ '^'^ o^'^cot^Ti-r^iooi cooo O ^ CO CO « Ht N vcToo" lo'o" ^oo'ocroo"oo"oo"\o"vd* ^cooviocrrCo'tCo'cotC cooo" H CO W HHCIHIHMMHIHIHIHIHI O^ CO ThWvO lOCO^OioO lO^O -:* Q\"0 J>- t>- OvOO O "O t^oo O lO cooo 0\ r^ r^ ^-O ^ CO ir^ t^ O w H CO CO ■* Ov H looo O ^loioovo -^lOO w locq OOOOO O^ vo" rC cq" lo ^\o"ocr o" »o t^ ^ hT CO «" fo hT ©"^"oo" tFco" lo co w" -^ « « t->.o0 00 ^ O lo r^ IN r-oO Hoo h o « coO*woo owi t^cO cOcoi>-ThioO co«00 iOiO«\O0000 coo coo lO lO HI CO t^ HI CO "^ "^OO 00 HI ^00 Nt^M CI ^0\0 O -"tcOO Ht t-00 On ^ t^ t^vO vO O lO tJ-CO coiOcOO-iOt^O vOThco^^co ^J")0 t^ COM lOioOvN « On>-< 0«^0 oO t^ O ■^ ^^ h co»0 w CO O "O 00 -^ VO lO t^ C0"0 H UTO .\0 OnnO « t^ O O w vO lOOO t^ »0\0 On O On lO ^ CO O OVO On « t^ l>. Ht O t^vo O O Ht w CO « HI CO O t^OO cO^O^ci 0*0 lOO cTco" lo rC CO fO cToo" cT tC lo o" CO o" «" cT cooo" rCNo" tCin o" co M CO « PO cooo M COtOCOM ^lOlOCO-^CINO ■^no lO "i^ tJ- bo sj i I s SSI'S! «||.&s iM I y s s||s| a9>jg a * o So o ^ O -M "2 « >; « wivo o'^MSdO ..*• W" M** SQ OS tJ »- .41,1 o ^,« a oS [x^s"" 8 o Mta '-5 '** J?** o •*S^'« <2 -U'^B^^o ■Si -a S !> 2 -I^JS o- ■2 M R" --So .a7d5.s|5 ^ - p q -fl l^^dogg w to -w'^'ocj K.H 9 _-a"'^ o ■S S S.3 S - o d ©"S a-S "'^ o o j3 w j3 J. £i u * .3 jj „-o +JVO "SfoU 336 Household Manufactures in the United States 1 pq I % 1 M 1 H J 1 M *•* % 00 H 1 1 CO M s J ■ ! I 1 5 ^ H^vo" »0 w" t^ On cT PO "^ h'vo' t^ w" ^ cT o" CO n" oTvcT MM W WMHCJ MCO M« MM r^ot co^int^OvO «"0 -^O ^^ O Oi^ioO POM m O.W i>-0 O OvOCO 0^0*0 ^>.M M CT t--.t^'^coPOM W CO ■^vo o) t^co H ci -^ OiOO ■<*■ POO lOOO CO O ^O « CO Oi\0 ^n CO COOO 10 d^ to CO «* i-Tvo" XOO^^M H eot^i-rio 00 ioc>ivooO vjiow POOitOO O lovo "^vo t^ O ^ O* 0» M On ^* C^ 1000 CO « Oi M 00 CO t^ 1000 O* ^ N "O M t^ M O MOO O'O -^^H Ttl-».POIOO lOM i>-0 0*vO 00 N TJ- ocT lo oT cT cT lo CO t^ M*^ cT dv^cTvo' ^00' ^ piTvo" «" ^ dv t^ §^■^0 O t^O lOPO^O^O POO t^OiO OiPOiOPOiO O\H00 W CO^OOV-^MOOO -"^l-M t^'^ONM M O O "^ t^ 100 >oco*'+ioof^O r^ M 00 H 1000 lOO M o" On m" 14* d\ poo" On d' po *^aS lOCOO^POH lOM POM v>tJ-^ t^\o « CO -^ M w ^ W M Q» ^ Ov CO Ov POOO C4 ^ tJ*oO m tJ- O pO ^ W -^00 O lO OvO O CO i>. On lOCO O POO O t^CO OCOOO c* lOPOO O Ov W °^ *^ '^ ^'^ Q. ^ ^ ^^ °«'^Q,OOO^M M M O ^ lOO loO M\o pOOnOCO O r- »00" On CO t^ o" PO cT iono'oo' cT VOM^CO COHM-^t-WiOiO-^lOlOWWlO «P0 The Passing of the Family Factory 337 MWMMWPOONIH W CO« tN«OOM Mo'oO O O VO H 00 ro 0\vO O Hvo O r^M loM t^ooo POW eo-^N.vO ■ O 00 t^OO • ON OivO W ^ t- coo V) - to ■* to -^ w^ r^ O^ ■^ O^ co'tCiorCc>o"^tC lllllsji MNONO lOM t^co^O IN O t^lO^Tl-M M o toioco-^potodN ■ t^ W !>. CO w 00 Tj- 0* W !>. CO 0* On »0 ^ M " CO H w M TtOO M ^ H -tt 10 H CO H H . OivO CO lovo 0\ w 10 ■^ r^ t^ s OvOO « CO ^- CO 10 fO « « M M ■* CO CO 10 « '-' c» M CO W M O VO Ov t^OO »0 Ov 0\"0 VO t>. tJ* « H O 0» vj\0 O* 0*00 ^ 00 cOOO N M M OIN.WVOWOO 1000 ^ Tf tJ-oO OiOO 00 O 0\« N 0vC00v0\*O»O 'i'VO ^vO ^* CO 10"0 00 10 Th co^ 10 CO ^ ViOO vO t^vO M\0 O COM O*v>«00 io»0^^« 00 Oir^iO^OvW W -^ 1000 00 «00 OOOOOO COM H\0 r-iot^»t^o O M mw 10 iflvo ^00 o coo o^t^O^t^^ CO o'vcT 10 COOO" CO »0"0'vd' 0»pr»0'*t^N''^V)« tO^OCH HMH HH H C4HH H ^ m ^00 « O .. , . . _. . . _ _ - _ _ _\ to H fO o^o o w M o» cooo *0 f^ «^ O; O; O; looq^vp^oo^ Q,'^^;^'^^'^^ cToo'^o' focTov^co^'^^cr^ covcToo" c^ 10 H coso" S^ ^ r^ t^oo -^M ooovooo ■4*cocoo\»oH o^n t^^^e^ CO M M vo t^ O»00 00 O 00 O^OO M ^ CO W t^OO O M O CO COt^t^OvHOO COOVH 0>0n -^vO w tJ*ThiHOO 0*000 ^ vcTvo'oo" 1^ lOOO" i.," -"'''■•*'''■•''''■"'''*''"■ vO^O O O OvCOO^coOvN OC» O O O ^ co^O '«i* t^oO t^oo N 0» w covO O coo t-t ^ Ov ^ ■* xooO »0 On »0 M lo M^ ^ "^^^ Q,^ *^ ^ ^ Q» "^ ^ ^ "^"^ ^ ^ "^^ " ^ to On On o" t^oo »o Ov H 00" Ov 10 m'oo'* O'^ rC ^ lo cooo" O" o" t^ P« ««C>* M^lO«HHCOMHIHCOCOHI-( t^'OmOOncOOvO« »OQO O^ OjvO O^H^^^cOl-^^^c^^ 0*^0^00 O^ ^ m^ Ov t>.00 00 to t^ 10 O H OnOO CO Oi CO f^ cooo" ■^corow"ioiod'd*t^^r W W N CO « cooo VOCUHMCOW M^IO H 1 11? 8 ^ .a jiiaa a cti S'c^ b^ a> aa s.a >^s mmpqpqyOOUOOOUOOOQWWfSSElS The Passing of the Family Factory 339 to r^ r<. (N 00 M H lO 0\ V) C* t-*\0 M ■* tN. M POM ^ t^'O ■^t^cO^OQO 00 M rs.vo VO HI lo O r^ CO Ov t^ to Th lo r^ H «N ■-4* O OO 00 O zt H H to H M '-' c*5 W3 W o M M CO H M H M H O o to CO to H H M « O CI PI M *H M 00 00 ■* O to COO HI lOOO C»-vO OO lO-O tj" CO to 0\ O\00 t^oo H CO'O OWO cOvO « VO H 00 00 0\ CO M H « w IT) ■*}• w o »vo Q Ovw Ov O toco« OiO t^cf M ^r^co« O»0oo ^■^"^t^ ^vo covO w o co c< to c^ 00 to O^OtTvo* tCocTocrvo"^ ir)totoo'"^H'lrCh'" ""*"'""'"'"'"'"'""'" Kr^M i^r>.o Thco tooo rf co m « h w m OvOO O to w cs cooo m t^ t^ to ^ to to CO CO Ov COVO xotowvovo Ovt^^Ov^co^cotO TfOO O O^ t^OO ^O « vO ^ Ov 1-1 w to COOO OvOOOtow O O tH ■^r^ 'TOO w O O m« w 0"^'J^O'*-t^cofO ^ « Ov O r^ t^ -^^O r>iOvovovO toMoO t^. tOOvO WVO OvQvtO^'i'COOvtM H coo oo lOH i>.co**Mvo r-'^Ov'H c^ r>.coO00 (>» m tJ-iocomoo ThH ^^c^ e* vocoO ^O too ovM^co tooo_^ ^^^.^'^'^'^^O^*^'^^'^'^ ^ O" ^ tC ^ ^vo' cTvo" CO cT r> ^ O^oo" (^-^ Ov t^ to CO ^vo" O" dv CO ^vo" H to to VO oi r^ Ti-oo O O 00 00 l^oo t^^cf cioovo Ovo r d* to cT c^ t^^ 0) VO tooo Ov Ov N ocT C>* W tovo « f>-vO C^ IN.H'^WtO WtOHOOWHCO'i'tONWMCl CJWMM'^COCOr^ 34° Household Manufactures in the United States I > n 1 M o M o 1 CO H 1 H 1 1 s, OQ M H 1 § ^ lo O O^oO cOOO so CO ^ w M O^OO «> '^ ^ M CO W « N M CO fO to ^ «*3 *■ '"I* t^ O t^ t^o »ooo O* ■* ^* Thvo £; O*°o CO •M M coo 0*i>*»'30 iOiOJ>*«0^ ^oo ^ c^ Tj- -«t ■^ CO M CO N -^^O C*CO-* •HNCI'^IO M M 0» f^ ^'S O lo lo CO c^ 0>0 OvcOO^cOO -^w co'i't^ co^O 00 to M O ?0 O OO W -* 1OC30 O ■* w H CO ^00 t^ ip iOH*crrCcro"coc^^ lONO" ^'O't/To' hT hT t^vO POO O'QiM 0\0v^^« to»or^ O^NO »0 eo « 00 0> vo lOO « OOOO ^W T^tN. OnnO Ov 0» ^ ^ O^ CO ■*0 e^ O !>; O^'O 00 r>- CO t>;^ ^ '^ Qs *^ '^-.'^ *^ 9i ^ ^^ ^ "^ ^rCoItCo^^o^dlt^ ©"^r CO t^ ^ ^ »o ■^ iC tC'o' « o 0\O « co-^tt^iOW O « I00vt-*0 0*00 00 00 tv. M M ^o cs e^ CO O "O CO ^ OvoO co lOOO O w O cOO O COOO O* h C^ lO CO'O CO t^ lO CO W ^ O too -^CiO t^tOiOO**^ ocTo" di ^o" cood'o' r^oo" ^ CO CO d^ CO -^ CO ^*>o o o\ *^ OO C^\00 H 0\0 lO-^C^ CO^lOO»t^ 0*0 H « lO M ^ W tJ- CO "too c^OO M « CO Oi Q t^OO C< %0 O O lO CO CO H « coco CO t1-vo t^ *>< o*oo o* cSo ^ ^"^ ^ Q* "^ T^^ cxTod* •^vd' to coo* ^ t^ CO CO ^o" 0*00*00 o « ^ h o to M«WWC4C4WCI CSI-tH«^MMMCOWH«H w c4 10 « O tooo r* O O ..,_.--__ , — — to C^ ^ OS ■^ coo POOO 00 MO COH HO*^ 0*0 t^OO tO 00^ to M^ *^^ *^'1;^'^«^*^'i**^9i ^"i Q. Q* ^ '^ **t "« M* rC cooo" CO i-T cT i-Tod" HTotT t^o* d'iH"d*o « coo*oqo lOCICOMWCO'N'i- COMMMlOt-1PO«'- IN ■* lO M 00 CO (O M HI On COOO CO fO W CO to O Ht O 10 Oi w 0\ CO O* W t^ too HI 00 t^ CO 10 cs t^ N 10 w" t^ m" cT tC hT M H M M H CO CO O CO t^ -^ O- Oi £-- Tj- ^>0 ^ tr> roo t^ ^rfvO 10 o" t^ ^ HI CO 10 O O ^00 H 00 t- looo H r>. Tt '^ ^^ '^ "^ °- "^ *^^ vo" 10 O* to o"o"o N 10 w ^ CO HI d o \o O^O HI t>- CT M r^ HI vo 00 CO »0 w N CO t^ O O h" w" t^ rCco* O*^ to M W O W CO Tf M vo 00 to J>- H C^ M o w c>) CO ^ tjD tJ- M O 00 CO ■a a a >» o .g iO«00OHi t^o* H ot^Hi o*r-«M M r-^co HI r^ CO to coO^coOiO woOoO'O'O cotoO hi HI WMCON«MMHC>»MThCfl VO C^COOOVOO tOHOO t-oO ^ to c* f^COO t^OviH lOtOM lOtoOvCOW ■^r^t^ONcocoto^i-*toti20 ^■^ ol co'o' to 'f T? CO cT eT cTod" m" ^vo" f^cO'^toC4i-i Ohi« m O co^hi OOoO e^oo coc^ tI- QvOO O m hi 10 O t~-t^cO'^tocO'q-M I>.coO\OnW CI cowoo coo O 00 t^vo ■^ c» ^ covO 00 COCO tocoO OOh OhiOO OOTt-OvOWCOC^tOHOt^tOt^CI irCoo" totOHvO 0\0\^Hi c»tHi lo-^ IH coeO(^^^HlHlHlC^T^rl■ 01 H^ ■ S o ocn«» .. X" - ■" «r a ^-1 ".*•.. - tj ^=2 So** 4> o ^ w n W 4.S«»..o ^M * O 2 S^«^^ o »r ^ - ^ai •3 Kffl ;---J "o 342 Household Manufactures in the United States Y 1 o M 1 a o M o H CO g J 1 5 CO o ■2 1 3 1 o i «0<^^00l-^colHHO^*0'^^0*ONOfO«wNMO^ ^°° OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOwOOO 0^^0 O 00 (» M Oio0^ox^'.o*OoO O* -^OO t^ « w ^ tN. t lOOOO^ O\W00 Th-^O^N -^ •*00 ON 0» O VO -^tOO CO , M lO-M O^VJO >ON t^O Ovt^ POO po « « M o *o foo t^r^o o*'^o w w onoo po o* MCTMWHCOHWMMMWOO W W MO T^iOCt r^^>.« ioV5^POPOt^ POO ^ M to t^oo ro eo O 0*0 lOt^rOPOO M t^ioiOW 0*0 co r^ m irjO O « -^ O O M OOO *N 0\rOPOTj-^0 v>oO ■* POOO 00 00 00 O m lO PO (^ o « t^OO COM w lOOv^ ^O t^ 0\t^\n O N -^COWO <00\^0 »OPO 0\0 t^ On ■**■ Ov 00 f^t^ONO ioOn^m iot^ioONJ>-M w o w M lOO 00 M C^ lOOO O CO lO O* lO »0 OnO On OnOO W W t^ r^ POOO « vcT cT oT m" ^ O^od'oo" On On o" 1^ OOa O O cT to w" lOOO" O MM-^N POMWM MCOPOWMW POWPO«« t- o ■* o o « M oo O « t^ M xn\£ lO « 00 Th -^QO O ^ MOOOOOOOO ' ■* tTO On to I>. »0 ^ lO M ■O O ^>-O0 t^OO M On V> PO ■ O tr^ t^ m fO "^O « t-* ^* r^ ^ t-i' oi ^ t>.' ■^O «' M^oo^o" «>r W TfWMWW lOM M Illl ■'^^■3 d mS ss o.g s ^s.gs The Passing of the Family Factory 343 Q O O O* loco 0» H 0«Ni-i'^4--00 CO ^ M o -Oh oooooooo oooooooooooooooooooo -oo t>.W POM «VO lOM loiO'^rOOifO-'J-M P» vo CM>. ^ OvO 0»00*'«1-000 irjw rfCMow m ThTl- oioOOMvo'Oi-iO«Ot^tOi- '* lOOO , po *;>. lo ■^ -^vo ooo M H ^tr*^ Oi^owoo^OO ^^Q !^'^. "^*^/^t*P_*^ P MQ0\O NCO M O POOvO ■0>t«.Ov'OW loO cot^t^O ON'^t^NCO O PO-^tH b tOC>-t^O O "^tOO l^cO'*': ^o lo o*co r; «_ o po t^'O o^ ^ HI lo Th H . MH WM ^«M)H PO lO O ■<*'00 OWO OW^OH N>0 ICO 0*IH lOO OvM lOt-^W O^-^^O « fO t-^O O^ »0 loo 00 00 lOOO CO fOt^OsM cow MOO o t^ ■^o O* lO lO ^^•^MOt^w ^ O^OO O O H C» H O^O « O* POO CO w O* lo ^ w lO N H 0\ M W lOO O O POO PO -^00 O to HI O* PO ^o o 0\ PO o ^ o»o POHOOO 0»0 -^lOM O^ O^O O -"t 0\0 00 O^HIO woo Ti-M PO« M -^O ^ M O^ lO Tf 00 lO O-O HI r^O On'^c^ POiO^POOi h 0» t^O W O oo O <^ CSO M HI Oho t-O O^t^r^Hiooo OO 0;t^ ^J^ ^^^ "^ ^ lOOO m_ o»0 « ooo ■* t-- \o'ioio^io»oi-rcr«' cTvo" hT ^ lo PO N^o" d\ cT n'ocT 'f lovcrotr ^ cT in lo hT HM.PO PO«Ht MM«" coo ^^*^'^'^**1.0; l>;00^ W^Mf^^O^^f^ COOO H C^ 6& M ^>i^^ovOoooo »oO ^ovo 0\ CO CO ''I co'O O W CO ■^ lO t^ lO MHCHWM POCOW O ** w^ H r>. CO *o io\0 O CO O OHM t^CO CO ^"O OO VO 00 .. M CO O^ CO covo O « M \0 vO CO t^ O tH IN CO to N lO C^ SO e* W COOO M 0\ OHt^ ^ r^ O\00 O t^ 0^ ■^00 irj^O « w tH H ■^ M « \0 \0 ■* H- M « 0\ o « « »0 w •.00 CO X>- lO M 0\ C0co-*0 VO H & a< S-^ tn Ti.S is^-^l < pq pa 1 si o g .95 •S.I II 'ft" ->0 00 13 M P 4J •I* a co'O ago §•8-. an? The Passing of the Family Factory 345 Th \r, OGO CO fO 0\ O WHt^roioOcoiH $^.s C* CO t^oO -. 0> CO »0 •-' w O H o " M O o O o o o o o o o H O w O o o o o o t^ Thco« tj-m w t^Mvor^ CO 0\ w 00 «oO O coioo^P* " cOTh-^d-Tl- O^OvcOW ■^1-'*'«OCMOWOOO w H H w O H l-l " ^ r^ »O00 CO CO covo r- 00 OO O O so 00 U-) lO CO ■^ O Tl- t^ COOO - O* CO W M xovo too Th O CO ■.H( eOHi O t^iO COOO c< w C4 CO ^00 O CO lO O CO ■^ HI (^ « ^vo W lOVO O wi tJ- IN O H t^ lovo 00 r*. 0\ HI 00 OOO 00 O ^O ■o^oq^ O^ o_oo. CJ;oq^ lo co w h c^ oo co'O <^^oo^ *^ o» Oi c^ o_ ^'^^ c^ o "O oo " o" cT looo" o^o" cT o -^ CO i:^ lo cT "NH M HHHHM M Nj- H HI lO t~^ H O es M Ov lo ^ r>- 1>» HI -^ 0\ O *o i^oO w Ot^Hioo CON Ot^ ^00 0*cot^iOH loioo^ -"^oO O (N vo HI 00 0^*0 O 00 N N t^sO ■^ cO'O co^OHi ^ONr^r>iN lOco too « f* H COOO -^ in in \Jt VA l>iCOH O>00 O vo 00 *:!■ N CO 0» OOO COOO lO Th « HI lO ccT «" tC lo ■^ vo r^ io\o ^ c>) M 00 coo Oi O* hi co t-Too ^oO^ Os fC «" hT lo m" O C0"0 O lOM 0*0 r^cOO^t^M XO lOOO coo CO t^ C^ 0^00 vo to -^00 -^^oo lO 0\ i-< vo Oi O OvoO e< NOOoooo O\r0Q»cocN woo w cor>-0 t^t^O w co 00 ^O COOO lOOO O "^^ '^ '^ *^ ^ ^'^^ ^00 COOjO^OvVOTj-t^HOOOO c^oo o"t^OOOc>i w pq H 1 o CO H 1 o 00 M o ■s a I -g oo H o ■s 1 H 1 ■ J ■«t 0» to H W \0 lO^O H t^ CO CO -^O lO COO Ov lO CO >ooo O* lovo WOOMOOMCON'O « r^ ^ CO *n OOhOOOOOOOOmOOOwO M O H O H H vo lo i>-\o vo cooc^'O r*.ioch« r^foov « O COOO H Ttt^cow COO^H coOv^OC* H H r^-^O vo H ■* CO •* CO HHC.y3 • 00 M vo lo r^ -^vO \0 oO ^o \0 w t-- o w lo -so COVO H CO O ON •'i'OO lO W H cov> ; Th t^ O O - 00 lO HCOOM .(NOlMMOHlOHr-lOWtH MM • O CO vO M O^VO Os ThvO 00*0 IOO.C400 lOC^ lOM t^OO O 10\0 OO OiOvcO^iOiOMVO ^M OiM IOCS r^io ^00 H H t^ "^^ '^^ ^ ^- ^""^^ Q. ■^ '^ "^ ^^ ^°*i, ^ ^°° 00 00^ H o* O vo" ^f m" lo "+ ■^'o' tC w" ov cs" covo" Ov cs'od'vo'' cT o''o' 'f cT H M04MMMMM NMMCOHt MHP4HHM o r^ O l^^o 'O M «^cot»-M ior-»o cooO m -^vo -^^O ^O Ov ^ ■^;^ ^ M ON o oo ^00 ON-^o^r-o ^-^Ooooo t^^o O^OO O^O H O w COO^M O COM coO»cow O^O OiOO m" CO t^ CO pT ci" m" OcS cOP*"c>rcr^ioioi-r m^oo" ^ t^ O* M C4MMMM MMMCt MMHM M M tN.corhOvC4 r^o COOO r^ w Th O M ^ooo cooO m pj w NO NO NO M C^ lO lO t^O NO oo oo t^OO lOt^^-^CO'fO O ^ ^^'^^^'^^ "2^- '^'^ '^ "^ ^°^ o^^°^ Q. "^ "^ ^ ^^'^^ 00^ h" conO^oo" on o" ^ CO (-Too m^ocTno" h" co co O* ^ o" «" On M M mm M M M T^NO -^NO On t^ ^ On O CO M t^OO On On CO t^ M M On »000 M M cocOOoO Oncs cocs O OnO ■^'h I^-^Onm ioi>-On CO lo CO r>; M M^oo '^f fOO Nooo on^^O O n ioti*ioco lO N lO W C» -"i^OO M W NO COnO ^ M M no lO CO lOOO M MMMM M MM MMMMW M On M O. O 00 tJ-OO nocs OnOIOCOO Om W OnOO lO CO O 00 ON c^ On r- cs -^oO VI lo ON r^ r^NO O « oo t^ t^vo >0 ^ COOO lOtOOOO O M .CO f^OHiHJ>.000 r^vo ■^ tr^ v^ y4 m co ■eh'O ^00 O0t^<-* t^O w ^»0 VO 0»^0 vo w o 00 lO lOOO Ov 0**0 >o lOO 00 c- l^vO PHWCOOOOO fOOw Ti-Tj-M «MOMHHO«tHHMO'^HlOOO«MOWOlHHO«0'rOIHlH>-«W ■ 00 to VO ' • H CS O < 0«w0c»0iHWH00-oo cor^M H t^rhco^oco O^'O lo Tj- T^oo vo Onw m r^t^t^H o^oo ^oo o t^PO^t^MvO HOG O'lOOti'lOO lOO* t^'O 0\ O O "O N H "<^ LOO O ^O ^ lO tO CO looo o CO M f-vo o*o iH Tij-roioiOHi cooo r^w lo-^iomo w o* *ooo CI i^ Th lo h" o d'"o" *o d^oo" d\'o' oo" fC o\ ^ n" d* "^ cT lo tC o" c> «' t^ d" to rC oI d"od" o M M l-l . « M IH H H M H M CS 0*0^0 « co'^O'H c^jN ^ i£)Qo _o H lo o :^ s? '^ Ov W t^ C>J lO lO-O t^OO tJ- O-OO "JTO to IH T? tC tC lo cT c^'^cxT -^ ■^o" o ^ loocT vo" 6 "" oivo" H~od lo w' t^oo t>-' lovd -^ >o •^ tH O\oo r- iH O O « IH O , H 'o oo cooo M T^ CI lovo o On CO 0» "^^O OI H cooO O CO M t^ M 0»OnIOO\C>1 com P0t^O low lOiO OOO lO O ■'t t^ O ThvO 'O'OMO\0NC>)t^ lO On lO-O nOOOOOOoO Onio« -^O Q rJ-t^M ci P4 hi iOi>-t^iOiOC>i\0 O^c^ cOcO CO Tl-VO t^ H NO lO ■^'O CO'^'thlN O COM lOCOO^t^O « « O t^vO CO N C* 00 00 M ao CO ^ 'i' cT On ^ o o^^ -^ cTvo' cToo" d» cooo'"vo"od' cT cT ioncT »o c^ i-T i-T (-T On w OnOO O t*- On ^ ^ O OnOO 0\nO co OnnO conO \0 O co^t^^OiOCOONt^iOO t^ rl" -i "^i-i C* ioOnOn-^iocOcocO Th'O CO On cT On ^ c^^No" cT pTno" cono" hT d\ rC •* i>^ lo rC cT cT lo cT iono" o" lo o" cT o'"oo''0'" lo fl^CI H H ■^WCICO C1CI'<^ CJWIHM IHMMMNVOCO •^ IONO. -^vO W lO'O lO c* d' ^ tC t-T cT CI lO « r>. CI M cooo On^cow O^ t^O w r^oo oo oo m m W O O lo IONO 00 000 lOHNO too ioOnci mnono Ti-HcOcii-iOi-icoc» ^'^^^'^^^^^^^^ P,°^ ^ ^ looo lo looo low HtvocoONt^ oor^'^M ^d CO WHt WMCIH MW CS On conO O lO O iS o 1 M 1 o PL4 1 H O 11 1 M 1 o to 00 H CO a O -HOcoOHiowior^ w •voOmOcOOpO«« OMO O « O M t^ O lo O w 00 CO ■^ 0» e^ O O CO OO w O lOO-NOOOOOO H M O O O « O O i-t covo 00 00 0» •* « vO OO co^ r^ c» 00 yD O COOO CO O H T*-vO o\oo ^ ■* TJ- PO lO « VO M HtOMOfOOOOOwo H H O CO O r* O « O w w 0»vO CO CO 0\ ■ 00 • ei Th M cocot^coci -Ov-oOmih en lo V) r^ ■ lO O w o ■ to -^t CO tO-O 00 O lO i>. •* COOO V}-^ O COOO CO COOO CO "^ O Ov 0\ N 10^IH"0 MOO W lOCHVO W IOC* M COCOM lOO WvO^O o" cTvcT rC tCoo" cO'^t^cs'coO^^iod^cot^t^toO^O CO NO coo lOCO^>■M COH lOOO COOO OOVO H « x>- t>- ifi ■ut o t^MyD Ooovo -^MOOt^r^iow m m O c* 0\^co« t^. t1-coOI>;M Ot^O O* "^OO, "^ ^ ^^^ '^ ^'^ "« ^ "^^ ^ ■^POtoi-r^POH'i-rcrH"H"tCroco^O''^t-t co COOO CO io\0 lovo 00 00_ CO CO CO (>r rCvo" CO H^ CO ^ lOO O^ cC i-T CO m" CO loNfiT O^ ■^ 0\ H 00 Ov ■<+ ■^OO 0^ t^ O ^ O^OO w ^O coO 00 t^ O^ ■*t H "O On Ov »0 CO On^ coO lOOiO lOcoOOO iO\0 M -^ t^^O *^JO i-t <>' Ov'-' O ■^■^O t^lOiOH ^"O OMO « lo "^ m" hT'o'dcT '^ co-o" cooo" CO rC ^oo" ^ tC cT cT cToo" r^ ^ U-) IH CO O O O lOVO "O \o « t^ lO lO so « M OO co^O 0\ HO O O CO ■* H ^ M vo c* so ^O lO lO CO Osscrso" -^ ds §■•■9 lO H t>. O so CO r^ w O O ■* O O^ Os H^ OS lO ^ Os cT cT oT .2 iSti 13 Ji o o C 3 c8 ca djn,3,i3J33 o o 2 u u Pts-w The Passing of the Family Factory 349 »0 «*5 « 0\\0 w O w tOOkM c^^ThOvOO « OoOm O 00 N ^ r^vo O ^ cooo w«o^-c*ofO«0\«nMO to o lOM« POC1 M COt^ ih«comOO»00 0m«00hw00000««0«N'N0000 IH o oooooooo vo Tf WOO r>-0 ■'l-w lo ■ ot^r-OTf-^coiOH -.^-o o a cow 0*00 M o*r^« M « fO PO lO ^"O ■^ iHwe*^MMHMHiH -Om««00«OhOO «N M OWPOOwW-^w 0'Ot^O»Oooo«'Oi>«o»(NoOHOO -OMvor^M 00 OO^hOhm^ow ■- CO TfOO 00 M PO IHl-»«IHI-lO»OMCOOrO«Ht^lH -MO-^OO M fOcOOOO««« M \0 O* moo lOfOi'iiH 0\0 ^oOv-^viiH low M cot^« ^H r«»c» o^O^woo .\0 OO t^ to O »0 °^'^-.*^'^^0 0*0 t^sO toiOCOOvO tOtOO^O C* tOMvO^O « o o t^ t-O w tC h" dl coocrvo" o» dv CO o" «" d>oo" cT cT tC d\ d'oo'od'ocr d^ tC m*" ^ o" eToo" to ^ hT H CO M W MH MM« COWWTj- MMiHWCiWwe^rO ONtOHoooo o^w w r-t-^o^p* o O^'^'^'^co Oi»o lo H n w oo o oo »ooo lo w O^ t>-00 O -^ W O »O00 O ^"O CI O^OO IH 0*^N MW OMOIN M t--so 00 »o ^ t^ O O lO ^ Ti- tO*0 00 00 H 00 « w too w t^N C^OO Ht « lOM^O OiM 0^*0'^ cooo lo n" to cTvd' -"^ cT CO ^ ^ tooo" cCoo" ^.\o 0^0 r^O tO(30 tM O O rO^O\tOlOcOO t^\0 co P< cO \o too M t~*ONO^o^cooo lo^r^tOMO looo coo O r^coto^oioooo rr MVO totoO IH COO^W M M COM lO-^O fOO r^« Ovt^W « lo w so CO r^ ^ M O coo N OvOO M O O 00 lOO OOiON 0« NCOOcOO TfO « t^ ■**• lo IH O OO W 0»0 -^ O coo Pf rhO t^H M O iH*O'ofow Tj-loo « o*M to^»oo 00 CO »o "* lo ^ ooo ^00 o^ t^oo o t^ r^ ■^o moo o *oo o ■ lO cooo 00 o O CO W M QtOO oo" hT tJ cT O M M f^O 0^ O t^ vj O 00 CO ■* w o w t»o »000 r^ O CO lOOO ■^ cTod* -^ I-T loocTo" CO 13 "' (8 52^nScatacasoa s-j^ Q, u g Q rf S 3 a "3 g J3 60 -. ■ § a a .3 gjOWnj 8 S-o -Is 35° Household Manufactures in the United States ►J 1 o CO M 1 M h 1 M o 1 1 5 00 M a 00 H 00 H i ? \0 W CO M • O M VO fCO 0000 N ^HO^O M O ^t^i'S MOOOO -t^iNOO-^ecJ-OWHiOMTt-MCOOO 00«H -OOOOOOH OOOOOOOHOO -r^HvOOOw I>.o0 VO fOO lO ■^ ■* ro • rJ-00 PO « CO O VO 00 00 - NMCHMHCOOOOOWO ihOOOWwwpoO ■ Ovt^-^w « OvNoO M N OvW t^iOVi^^^OvfO^W CO cooo ^cot^Moo o ^n -^ ^00 O O o^ t-*oo VO M Q tH tv.'^iOOoO Ovi-toOvO ^"„*^^"^Ovo^ ^"^ 0«,^ A. *^ w coOv^^w cow o)vo Ov f^vO ior>-M r^c* -^Ov^Ov^o HH tHHHC1«CO « HC4(0<0M M « O O Ovvo Ov t^ Th O ir^OO O*iOThOvt^000 co^t^OO « 00 Tf ^ 1^ r^vo « ^ j^ H t>. ci t- coco c« t^ M O M \0 r^H co«"0 w O O V3WQ0 O^OvO O^ ^ ^^'^ OvQO '^'O VO lOvO VI r^>o vO O t^ *O00 cocoiHvO O OvO t^t^cOH « OVM W W Ot-*O^CONOO'1*H Tl-O MVO w iOO\coo ^ ^ CO iOQO Ov'^t^^OW « OvfO'^M COM t^H lOt^O i>.oq^ ■^^■^■^^'^'^ "^*^^'^« ^^'^ *^ ^ ^^'^ *^°^ ^ hT ^ cT tF rp ^ co^cT CO m" ^ cT rC cT CO ^vcTo "OWN c^r^o^^ -cocoOvO »ooo oO -^oO O^fO^o^O O rot^ O-^Om •iocoH\oOOO»w^^OHOOviovir^ O W MXO •t--t^CO« Tf-^OVH H COM H OOOvOO « OV "^ M M ^ O OV •^ C* H lOO VO « 00 CO lOOO lOvO cooo 00 Ov CO r* 0» N covO Ov t^ O^ CO CO CO lO Cl C3XVO lOiOO t^'^OOOvO Ov'^^^N N -^t-t vO t^ t^ t^ lOOO MQOvOOO t^ -^ O M 0\« M COOO 00 W CO tC lo rC m" o" crvo'od'"o'"oo"'o' cT i-T CO cT foocTvo" lo lovcT liOC* M "^M OOOmW lOOvO « MOO M M U^^WOO « 00 VO Ovoo CO cooo -^00 r^ot «vo '<1*0 Ovm ih lOOv t^ CO M^ c^^ r^vo^ « ^ c< « '^^c/Q M ov Ov e^vo co "^ vj w M COVO CO lO-o ■*i- -^ CO CO ll I s 3 s g-g-a :.s t; 13 a |||||;3,S §.-§ §•! I o^ g^ s:^ 3- The Passing of the Family Factory 3SI H COOO W5 CO t^ O H « lOOO O M M O O M H o o\o o ^ r^ t^ ro m li^oo 00 00 00 10\0 OO 00 00 o vo 0>00 N CO CO O M M M c» CI -00 OH tocOC^ O coc^OO* ^HOO POrOt^w ■^c^coc^ ■* M H 0> t^OO CO »HCO >OlH H 00 M O CO ^OO 00 lO « CO M vO Oi*0 On r>. CO M lo H "«}-vO lO iOnO ■^tOC* « lOlOt^t^ lOVO vo" w" ih'oo" CO ^00 O 't -^ M CO WW (N H M W CO H lO * io»oON*oO'000 es\o i>-t^ O O «" t^oo" O^ CO dv -^ ^O H (N Th H H H ooooooooooo QMOHOOtHMO'-lt-' ^^oooo H ^Hvo^ooo loio 00 lo r^oo vo w H t^ ON »>■ CO OoO coO**ot^ON^TfO -^ low t^M W t^P*00 M OnW W f^ H t^\0 O O lO CO »0 CO H, O T^ ■^ H 0\ M^ O^ O^ *^^'^^ lOiOH M 0*0 lOl^WOOO COOO H lO On O ^ OnoO O OO 00 t^ iH W On M M I^"0 ■^ On t^ O O t^ lo r^o CO « « ^ M^ h" lO lO O" ^ h" cT ^ !>. C» O 00 to lOOO lO W 00 t^\0 CO WNO Th 1 O H 1 i CO H o M 1 1 O H 1 I "S O lo CO •* lO'O to O 0\ OsvO CO lO OS O vO lO to OHWOO«tOOMO oooooooo o o o o O O O O O Os O CO t^vO CO "O N vo o\ C* M w CO to ^ H \0 tH t^ t^ lo Os CO OOOOmOhn o o o o O w O H O ■ « CO - W CO t^ w c» ■wo - N CO H t>.vo o ^ - • lO w - ■ r^oO co\0 CO lO H Tf CO to H CO • O O - O o o O M - ■ O O O O H o 00 t^ ^ M "O vO 'O I^ ■-;^ c» H COCO CO H lo CO ^ Os . lO H to t:J* CO OsO HI 0\ O ^+^0 oci (NOVO cow envo to l>- M OvsO Os« u^OCOCO O t^OvO O tOO t^vo Os CO t^ M o) r^oo CO Os Ov t^cO O « CO cfl o o to tO^H O O CO^to tO^O « lOvQ ^ W O.00 to t*. coo O C^toOiO'O co^^i^OOO wvO COOO O H to « cooo cOsOoOcoiH « oi -^ O OsOOOHr^r^ o^ i-i totoCTco ^r-oiOsso (Nco^o m o ONtow H"cotC(^^^^CtCc^ o*co ■^mi>.h"co'^ O w cot>-toO toOs 0» to to O w O ^00 to to « to Os Os - T^ t^ t^ O CO O to CO m" cT h"sO OO" The Passing oj the Family Factory 353 OOOOtHONTtOOOOO'N-^ v> 6 o o « « o o o o d o d o o o o d o o 6 o d o o d d o d o « d d OOOOmOOO e* « o O O lO lOOO M 00 ^ O»oo r^oO \0 t*500 t^ O^ O^O w w looo OOfOwfOwO— , -- r-co O O^oO H Hoo O^^^w loio tO'O fO O*oo ^\0 lO POOO O^CO O On^ ii^tv.« M t^O W50 -^M Ov« li^t^ M Tj'Os'OfOH'O'O .\o <^ ^°o_ "^ "-i crvd* ol "^vd' dl oi lo coco* m' VO W IH H H ro M Tf O M W ■^00 t^ On O M H M HWiOfO hO\0»OOn« 1^ m" CO h" loco O «00 rOTfM en roO^ t^cow t->.rO<>t^ O^'O r^ O\rs.o lO^OMvOCO w*o o w t^ t^OO vO (^ HI lOO "O o t-t (Svo ^w_M Onih com iH UTO -^coiOrOPOO fOOs^ w"00 co^ On h" hT ^ On i-T to ■.POfOrOrO000 OivO fOOO •* M y M " B 3, 1 y> g r^oo M O -■J - S o S a 2 ^W § SrS S ia o . 3^^ S.S l e-3 sl iS: SoSgg "1 -■? ^ "Bo" S :g gtn "2 : ^3 «)" o _ro o w U 3 -g^ S .3 3 S o K 3 "» s-rt^ S :&' OJ _ ^ 6 rt'S.j 2 " .. =■ 5 w - O fi^ * 1*5 § S -R ■ S S S « .3 o^S >- * ans o •« c :r-g.a' I o„- .9 "5 B n .. a" o ^a B n a 9'2 S5i£°S 354 Household Manufactures in the United States i X > X H pq 1 1 O 1 M 1 i o o is CO H 1 1 o o 00 c i J O O M o o o o M O O O H o o Tf 0\ t^vO « 000 CCN H00iOt>-i-t H row POOv r>.0O O 00 r^O ^H 'tJ'N roio^o^O O* t^^O O to eo O* w t-t yj rf CO H_ O CO M 0*00 O'OCOCOvO'OvO O ^ho r--t^co m" lO co^o" j:^ w" lo ^oo" h"'o" CO -^ t-T ^ 0» ^ ^vo" 'f t^ lO c^oOvO ^^0 ^^toO*N MOOOO loco O lO coco OO o» m lo CO « f^ r>.co H Mco coi^»oov^t>»«co t^« O coo t»«. to «0 0» W 00 0*00 t^H «J-t^iO« Cfl t^cot^w O CO^O O" o" oi h'vo'oo' CO cToo" rC t^ r^ CO CO cTvcT coocT •«? lO hTvcT i-t Hvooooo N t^r^r^ioio^coO ^oh ion o Ooo « lO -^ H CO CODO lO W CO 0icaBil3^da^O'a3'3S^.S^"l3oM <;<;<:pqpquooouoyfafeSi3jSlz;o(Sp!i The Passing of the Family Factory 355 0« H 00 lO Tf *>. ON* « o o O M H ?t^ : H O O O ; « o CO c* p-i d o cOjf c^ do o g - O -^vc ^ (O O H Th CO *^ lo r>. POO lO O ■* O IH to t^ tJ- coco w lO to Osvo O O M lo W \0 CO w ^ O lO CO O CO 00 & O « CO to O^ d "^ r^ lo tn en en cfl en P l> looo O • oo O O CO CO r^ CO ■ M CO t^ w PI • H NO C4 Ov to c< - M O CO w On O O H • O " oO CO O • o r^ O O H M t-~ONNso '!^IH M r^ CO O O O CO CO OiCO r* -oo ■ • O w ■* w CO ■ • r^ CO M xi- CO O W CO ■ O ■<*■ coo • • r* -«i- H H CO lOO On i-t io\0 « O'IhnooOOO'O tOW NO co^O r^COEN W t-^C^O 0»0 conO CO M CO M rh O -^ I>.NO t^NO CO ■^ CO «^ «_ o w -^o c.t--COO OnO co' o» d* oTco'vo" h" ^ to pT m" CO d\ to cT tJ- h CONO H toOOO'O O ^r^« toNO CO M O toco TO M t^oO o> to M O t— CO ^iOcocO^OnO O OnN On^^O t^NO On On ^ m" o" pTnO*" co 'n' m^Oo'' cT itC rf m" O 'O trj 00 00 O On to ■* On NO CO to CO *<*■ ON -"t ■+ On On OnOO 5a No ret No ho andS ven: B ouse, ] Ego^S A-fsS 3S6 Household Manufactures in the United States o 1 > < H 1 i 00 H 1 1 i 00 H 00 H 00 H 1 1 5 00 H 1 ■1 1 • O »0 0\ VOOO lO Ov Vj r- ■^ H \ri tJ-OQ O CI OO CO t*. O ^ £r^ S" • o O '^ H H O lO H H H H H o o c< H M « H o « en lovo 00 t^ o .rs. cOcoO^OnW O -^moOW m h « cooO 00 en CO "^O *0 *>• H CO r*\0 H O CO coo H CO « (OO COO 00 Cf coO VO O* cot-Ti^i-^-^M iocoMo"coo»o*coto '4"od" M oo" o* o eT rOHH HH HMM WN CIW WM OOOOOO ^cO'ttr^Oi t>.00 PO^coO O*«00 ioOnh ^ Tj- cj (N^ Ovoo OvO '-J^'O M r^co-^t^Hoo t^ «-\0 O^ t^ \0 CO Oi m W H H lO O t>- ^ lO lO W ^O M t^ ^ c» 1^00 w lO looo OOO COHOO O c^ coo OO or^t^ »oo O OMO r^O lO vj lilO C0»OM\O H cocow IOCO« t*-c^ CO O '*!■ CO 0\ OvO W VO lO CO On M lO lOOO »0 « -^ lO Oi W coO^Onv^m cOHt w t^o loiopT'^fiocot^ONcrN ol^ O 'd-O COOO t^ t^o ^ O CO c>) loO t^O O^ 0» c^ lOOO M 00 O* -^ ^ « 0» COOO ^ ^ l>.0 -• M - lO to o »o o • 0. lOOO M -OON .lOCOCO«fOWO O CO O CO M o ■^vo ioco^OOnOOO O O O^O \0 w CO m « CO 0> O CO M CO COOO CO On lO '^vO On On CO i-c lO t^ t^NO M M\0 M OnOOOioih COnO no OvOO On co CO W M C* COOO NO t~-.l>.C^ ^^O COiO OnnO c^ HMC^IH C^C^C4IHIHC4 tJ-00 Owr^w *>-t cow o-^Qc^ -^-O OO OO ^ tONO M «NO COt^^^ONII N 0»M lOlOM ^tJ-com W Ovt^O'O t^-^cOMQO OnOnW ■* hT n" tC rC tC CO T? T? -i^ o" >o M^od' cTvcT tC t-C ^ M Ht WMMMIHH t^ONM M H coOwio-^H H O O coOOO O lOOO lO Oi CO lOCO NO 00 ■'TOO W c-1 C< 0\ lO *oo NO 00 H ■>;fNO NO CO ON On -n-NO OO 00 IH M NO C* * *HNO ^Tj-M COM 0) OnnO lO « * * w O CO NO M 00 , _ _ _ _ COMNO COrfr-^P* On r^ O t^ 0« r^ w •* "^ w o o C4 « " o CO lo O lo O to ■* COOO to C* NO O OO cs o^ vj r^ ■* NO M CO w « M IH lO Tj- o On :^ »o CO M OO w O ? M M lO lO lONO M O o On CO M tH M CO On O C^ CO CO M t^ lOOO * to CM * O OnnO « m no oq_oq^ '^ "„ ^ (-T o"©©" cooo" M M M C4 M CO * C< CO On r-NO O ■* « M (OnO no no cOnO OO O^ Tfr*0 w On COOO 0*00 lOTpcor^Otf^o'coco M (MM H4 CI M « M ^O "^ O tocoPO "«^ to CM \o 00 r^oo CO r^ CO On O C* W IOnO CO l>- ■^ cT cT T? ocT tood* rCod" ^ In. to OO CO t-t r^ to '^ 00 o -^j- ThNO M qO )-< O On so « C* « to lO o" w On »0 CO CO c^ NO CO t^oo CO ■* ^00 r^ •-• to lOOO NO 0*N0 M On ^ w On On Onnq co co C< oO C*C1vOOWOmCIOn CO rj (H fl q3 S P < pq pq PQ PQ m pq CJ O 3S8 Household Manufactures in the United States > X m J 1 M o <2 1 1 CO H 1 M 1 1 S 1 M 00 1 H .1 1 I 3 -*0 ■^ t^ CO ThOsOicOOiOvW ^f^c*CO H coco H t^co^OO ^lo '^'^^^'^'^'^^^^^^O t^I>.M ■^POCO>0« t>-WOO lO oo 00 \0 .\ri io"0 ^■^vjiorC'i^eo^^H'iotCiot^ « lo ^00 't'N coo c» -^^cq loiococOM O^covjm « t-^ OCOOO lOP^ t^coO O OiO>0»iO coo »0 O CO O VJVO 0» *^ ^^^ '^'^ '^ ^ "^ "^^^^^ ^ '^°^ w^ior^cocowoo « \o o\ c^ lo o GO lo COO c< ■^ lo h" cToo'o'scr i-T lo cT lo -^ -00 POM J>-0 Ov'^ft^O ^O Th H 00 lO CO N^ i^oq^ O, *^ ^^ ^ 0^ '^'^'^°° OsO\0 On'^ih 0\0 00 M 00 r^O tJ- t^ O cTscT CO c^ rC tCoo" ^ o" lo CO looo" cT «cso\MW««co t(-0 -^^co^io^w co-^N co« J>. c^ looo corhci N Oic* lOH c^ o i^'^^co hT o" H '^J'O O^ \OC>)i>«COiO lO lOPO 0^ crt H ri **'"■" ™ ™ ™ The Passing of the Fa/mily Factory 359 • t» lO On lO N • OO M «N M CO - lo OvoO fO fO • eo 0\ CO M rJ-00 lO M OnO H ■ O • M w O O "N^OcowOnOh^ -hi H ■■^ t^ CS IH IH O O 00 OS -* Ov OnOO .00 lO C^dCflMOWC^OcOCOMM O *i- H ci « CO *0 H l^^O H W CO H lO M H O "O Ov On 0\ \0 CO ■* Oi rO^ lo w Tt t^ TtoO O CO H CO PO W H H ^>i H- lO Tf\0 lO Oi - O O OnOO C0"0 O cow H co^OOnhi m co-co H O T|-H>O0000 CO cooo W t^t^-^cow Goo ■^OO t^ tJ-CO h O t^ w CO H COCX3 •'too CO O t^ t^\o looo o H H oi UTO H Oiio'^ioo cow OcTo^'tONdNt^CJ^^cO VO^cT On C^'"^'"'o' t? ir? lo por^coiow O ONTfc^ coiOI^-MNO CO OO OnW tJ-OvW coiOM OvO c^ e^ O 00 ^ Oi OiOO CO CO CO ^^ Oi W W CO^O t~^ On O COOvOiH COQ lOO H H ■'tONOV^^WOO N ThH^ONO M ■'to « OiOOvCNCO co-'^coO Q o) looO locq t^cow O^ O lorhr^Ov^oc^ O OcT hTocT o" w" pT m" loco" CO "'t C^^^O CO t^ CO O ■^ CO 0 O t^ CO w w ocThTTFioioo'^d' •^ t~>.00 On M Tf W On w r^ O CO looo Hi. CO lo cooo lo CO r^ iono oT h" T? Tt stoo cTno" MWC*nOCON^M 00 ^ O lO ON On NO 00 C* M M M On On ^nO criH'c>r^coioH''t lOOO c^ On r^ cT «N CO ro ^ >o lo • to »0 »o h" Ov f^ ! ^ «" O O " g o^ :^ go 43=3-3 3 a rt § <^ 360 Household Manufactures in the United States > X w n I s .'1 1 00 M 1 a 00 H s ■2 00 ft 1 M !. a 6 d d G ■4 (O 00 10 H H 1000 CO fO t^oo vO w w w w M M 00 5; ^ PO H vO PO O* ■^ b«- -^ 1^ ■^ l>- -^ fO 10 00 CO l^vO O w oi cT rC CO po cT 00 C4 O ^ r^ O i>. ^ -^ IH 00 O* t>. h" in c) H i-T to CO Tt- « H On M H ■^ Os*0 10 i>- r^^o 00 ^00 10 cT cT I-T m" 00 CO "N 00 « M inoo POOO cooo 00 00 HI W ON « 10 10 H 00 00 10 On 0. J>- 0\ Oi NO On -* On 5^8 00 CO M CO (^00 H On »0 ■^ CO fO w W PO w c» to H cn M NO 00 NO 10 On NO H . On C< On O* • CJ NO Ht 00 CO 0» " to « ■ to in in W (H inmciNO w ■^ONt^cow -^ t^ On r^OO \0 PO ■^ ^nO no OO 9. ^ Q. '^°*i. °.. "T *^ '^ *C^ od"t^dNdNPoiotCindNcrw" w H H NO t-inONinO r^« w ^hr^ 0*0 Ht^i>-i-i (M ht}-m c^ 10 ■* q^ On On pOOO On •* m m pOPOiO'^Fc^c^popoiot^in On m m H t^oo m on cono no •^ On O NO to lONO m « ^ -^ ONt^w mw Tj-t-^co-^ t^oo hT ^ ^ CONO* m" I-T c5n cT ■^ cT N lONO I>.NO PONO ON O POOO WOOOO H ^ONt^H OnnO On m onoo 00^ po -^00 NO NO moo cT d" d' CO d" rCvd" o^so'io'no' NWHCOWH^nMH 'I* ^* OnOO po O 00 « w o On w T^ inoo w ON inoo \o o* w On -^ N m on*^- t^ in « n ^ m t^ ^ M *o 00 no m po w 00^ t^ ^^ "^ in rCocT ol PO H *^ W On On ■^00 in tM NO tN -^nO M PO in c> po in in CO ^ H M 2 a ^-JS a a So 3^^ cTS-aJ . CO M M to M cO*0 f<^ IH W 10 M M M Ct M OtHPOwOOMO H « W N « M M N « H N vo -"4- r^oo H 10 1000 ^ M M5 10 H 10 t^OO 00 (M J>. « W H 0-* M fO 10 M H « M HHtOOt^HONM .vO rt-OO « wioO HI ^vO PO H CO w -^ COVO 00 00 i>- t^ CO !>• O* !>* »0 O^o0 00 rou^oi O ^O « ■^J-o>t~>'^ lOOO vO ■* O^ tH H H MHIC*lHM«MtH W M H .iOPOO ^H o» MO Ovt^0 10 w* -^ ei" CO ^vo t^ POO O^ ^ "^O O p^ cO O 10 c«) Tf\0 ''ti-io loO CIOO NO 1-4 100 Oi»>^^'i^*ocO« low 00 -0 w Os^^w rf-^TfPH coO>W00 O ^- « l^« Tj*iot^iOPOCOwO r* ^00^ O ^ <>!_ PO O^ '^"^ "^ ^ "^ oo'cTolo'cow'f^ioiOPOrC^ ^vcTo" t^ c^ ^O po 0\ « d ■^ r^ O* O^ N o ^O 00 w POt^« O Oi^O>-^»ow ^low w o (M H Tj-w 000 w.ovoto^woooo to ONPO'^ONPOONPOt--c^O00 w PO'^ior^ POO w t^ *^^ ^ <^„ w" ^ d" oioo^oo^ cirNo"oo o w lOl-^lo^'^dNPO^*w onw poo COWWWW M OQC^ OINWH Hwwc^wrow p< « 000 « t^ OnO Tt r--o t^ 0\ CO PO 0\00 in •* T^oo 10 t^ 0. On t^ r* cooo 00 10 PO ■* Onoo w 30 On CI W CO N PH W TfO 00 w PC On On -^ PO On pOOO On ■^ 1000 a 10 -^00 « 0) ^ w CH w w w W w J3a o P H ?* &a .2 o C:3 Soc36o«£ooS»^2.£.;5^333S§SSS§ Si -S i S g-" s. ■ -•(3 H« «g •Si s : -"S o o g |2'i.3£ro_s d £§£•— Sis' "3. a «).aa**.2'2 = ua oja .. d^Tj? ■'^•SJS-S 9 o ^ o 362 Household Manufactures in the United States •I 1 1 00 00 H 1 s 5 00 M 1 1 J 1 5 CO 1 c 3 ! O w^ « M lo ^ w^ loco H 00 w »o^ O ^ ^ ^^ 0\ coo ^iot*3»ocoOoooo ^w Ovoo O O ^ Ht rf »o HMMWHfOMCOMi>.« Ol-^OOHO^*^-^-0 O lOM « 0^w loO^coOvO 0»^« -^w cq Qi'^O t^r^ wo CO H CO ■* CO oico 10 ^ o 't; *9 ^ Q^ ^"^ ^ ^'^ *" ocT 10 d^ oi ONCO 00 d\ cooo" h" *" O M 00 10 O 0» 100 00 H 0\ CO O Tf 't cooo CO • fO 10 'd-O w 10 O ^00 Ov 10 CO t^ CO 100 H t^ -^00 10 t>. r^ Oio« cs woco H o\M ^ '^^'i ^ ^ ^ O;oq^ '^ 1' ^ ^ ^ 10 ^ t^ 10 coo'o" coo ol O' c^" h" H 00 O\00 -^O CO ■* iN-'tO O 00 cOOsO*OCO coo I O 10 c*o co^H •*« t^o^ioiOH M "•i-r^ior^io loo ^ IT) ^* r^ OsO ON -^ ^''^ "^ looo Oic^ i-i 0*-0 « HOO !>■« CHOOO H OCOIHt^COH C^^H«OlH 0m« COO-^N """""'^''''"d^Ovco ^O* 10 cT « hT On W M H lO H O t^ CO W 0\ N OnO O O^ CO, CO t^ -^00 ^ O O 10 O iO^« « t^ioio-^r-ioco ^00 M On 10 CO r*.oo 00 ^ ^'^ "^ '^«°9, ^°^ "^ "^ ^ "^ "^ ^"^^^ ^J*^ ^°9^ o cT ^00 '^ m" i-To" ^ d'o'oo' d" coo" ■^ oT co i-T d" MMMCOIOCSHHCOCOM H M MMCi r>.'^0 O O>0h Oc»ow 000 MThiOHC* hoooo 1000 ^ O 00 On O lOOO 00 tH 000 0*00 OnQ cOOO 00 l>- H Tj-O CO loo coo T^ONM coOnQOOOO ^00 H 00 O H The Passing of the Family Factory 363 CO w 00 H M '^ 0. w « H «N ro COO 10 >o ro M \0 0^ W3 O^ 00 r^»o 00 00 10 to to fO 10 M O r^ O On H CO CO CO OjO tC o" to M \0 CO H 00 O CO O^ w c) 10 O M On 0\ O oi-- n g (u III CO c* 10 • -^ ■ r^vo CO H c^oo M H Ov 100 r^vO CO On ^00 -* lO -^ w 10 ■ IH HI w ■* ■* HI H( CO Tj- H 0\ CO ■* 10 to M 00 »o 100 tH H •* On w to On CO to c^ « ThO CO vj w H c* HI CO ^* IH CO •* 10 01 t^ "tJ-OO Tt- o> « ^ 10 t^ « 10\0 M H tv. CS CO * 00 OnnO CO Cfl T^ 00 On On On O^no^ rC ^o" rC 10 co »0 ^ tC cT 100 ^toO COOOO HI CN) po« Ovf^ CONO ■^ HI HI HI t^OO NO ^H t^ONt>.ONO MOO W t^'O HI O to OnnO On On lOvO nO i^ W O coco^t0^cot*-W w COW t^cot>-toco ^O GO Th\0 On N vO M 00 lO^ M ^^ On O O ^0^00 OnnO \0 Oi-O 00 N O NO '^ "^ CO . On On cT cT 0< toioO O IH HOO H OtoOioO ■^oo O 00 00 tooo toc^o COP* r^coON'^top) ^ 10 t^ On ionO O^WPInOOnN OcoOn OOcOMTj-toto mOhTp* hTonI^ vO to HI 10 HI ■^S!3:aJgs-c«2M«oggs ■Si's IS 9> * « c^ i^ h 1- '^ ohj ta^^ MbS -5" "« "* < -wo '-**&" ■- o -g 'i-a".Si& ■ " -5 mo oS „- ■ o 3 c* _'^ S -_, ©*• I'iS'S b^.o 3;iQ ^e3 • ^00** -lo -2"?wa .S«-o~-3 S^fU") 3i:J "^ d—" "^rt ■ 2 O Oib t*^ O '^■Ji** 364 Household Manufactures in the United States 8 e % H ^ ^ ^Tj-^t>.lOM (NVO lOOO ■^ ^ I') C0"0 ^ cooo H H r^ r>. t^ Tj- « t> ■* "* coco OOOWfOOO'i- (OO Ti- M « \0 ro 10 M ) c* coco CO w o\ c> r^ pooo 10 m '^ M iH N ^ N O « 10 r-sO lOH (00\iH w Oi^iMvOOOt^- C0*0 c^MVO t^Tt-o^O^ir^w MOO 0*0 t^^-^t^HOO lo^^lH 0\0 -^ ro t^ M 00 O 00 0^0 00 O « 'O^^ H w 10 w P0\0 T rf rCocT dl rC^cT CO 10 ^ "^ ro tC H"*o"co' 0^^0 0» CO M 00 M Tf W »OT^t^^oO t^fO-^O^^OO* cooo CO M ■^ O »0 O^OO 00 »0 M Oi Ncoc^c^c^Hh^' co mwioc^cTcThT crcThTtC CO ^ C>» C^ -^ -^O ONIOM O I^lOO 10 £^\0 en 10 Tf 'tj- Tf « ^ CO ■^ « ij-oO 00 lO^O CO 10 « c^ 00 CO C0"0 0» O* O O "-i h Ococ^oovowroo* Ovr^^OO\co«w\ot^NCicoiH cT cT (o tCod* coeT CO «0 CO « 10 -^ t^ ^ ^^CO CO ^ c^ 0\ 0\ On\0 Oi IH t^ MMC^t-IHMCO OOOwM-^^csoOOiOC^^ co-o too O COO tJ* w ^ r^M on'^woooovo ir^r^ON O^co 1^ 10 ^ M IN lo^t^OO rt-O O t^^c^ ^w rfcox^O t^iOH c<0 M 10 CO Ov O cs N ^00 c* O 00 w O 100 Ov »o r* t-t "t3 S ■« !«.. -9"0 -M o 2 „ - ^. _ The Passing of the Family Factory 36s OOOOOOOmwOOOOwOhOOOOOOOOO O HI O O M OhcimOOOOhm OHntHOMOMIH M "O ^O 0\ t^OO 00 ^I^^w Tj-PO'^M OvfO POCO PO'O M w r^ o ro 0\ ^ O -^ N .>o O \0 M O O ^^ O -^OO O 10 to w « Oi <^ f-TocToo cC pT 10 0*00" coco" ih" oi m" cT loco'co'co' o\ 10 t^ to po o^oo" o H H C^HH MWCOlH H M HMWMWMM cor^coM •efr-rN-wvoo »oco ^fw ^O « woo Ot^O 00 00 W f^OO CS W 0*T*-00000 ^0\ CO CO cocTtC t-rcro" t-Too" tC m" o» ^ to ^00" 10 ^ C0^« r^ior^O^r^cow coo cocoO toOoo ^h o»coc^ OvW'O lo 10 ■^ r^ Qi O^ w v)00 00 >00*M t>-M H o»c^o O COOO Q^00 « o c* 1000 \n oi^vo O H C00*0 COO^O -4^toO»co>H O co^iOOv m" CO i^'>o ^t-T o^cTw'toc^tH'iocCcrci'io-^ c^'oo" ^QCT m" C* H W MM W 10*0 M 00 O On r^ r^O vo M CO r^ i ^m « ^r^MWCoOM ioO*MO»0»«t^t^c< OivO t^ ^O M M r>. M ■M '^M CI lOCl OvC*00"O i i; " 3 o aj.3 aj ^ a o I^ oj c! !i_i ^i ss & o ti S o in u M 2 ^2- o I ^ — S goo's; 00 - — M o ir **5 v^ J-- O -** - -9 ^ ° S g~ c»<» 366 Household Manufactures in the United States 1 M CO 1 H 1 H . s M 1 M 0] 1 1 ^ 1 M 3 1 H 00 0*(NO HvO-^tH « OOv t^OO 00 10 PO H hmOOOmOi-iOOOOOOOOOmO ^onOo m o Oi^Mso co^r>.w 000 lovo odHOMMdNMOHd-^HWOHM "O O^O CO 10 « T^ Ov lOQO CO OvO HOO H ioO*W "O POM H M w ^M0i\0"0 10 O»00 M CO fO O ^ M O^O^NCO rfH M fOOO lO^O -^ O w M r^ O "O r^ t ■^ -^ ■^ H o» ■^ cooo r>" 10 ^00^^ o»« w ^0>0;co»o H 10 10 w 10 -t *^ rtoo 00 CO w 10 l>-00 w O CO O *^ ^00 O*Q0 t^oO ■<4--0 00 00 10 -^ t^CO -^ OvO t^O tOMOOOO M o cot^O co^ohO ih O^ « ^10 ^\0 ^"O *0 O « 1000 c^O^« O H-^-^eot^w 0»0n 0»'0 »0 O lOM lOMO 000 O^-^-^M coco M ^ r*. o* coOCO « ^O 'i-H 0*"*0»^0\»0 »O00 vo CO VO CO M ^ M CO 0» 3-3 d'^ K*3 S.3 :g The Passing of the Family Factory 367 « OS H 10 H H ? N \0 00 CO 00 ■<1- ■^00 CO M CO CO CO Ch • Ht -^ "-• « H M M H H « W 10 w ■ wmO. O •OOW'*}"i-^^o^-cOO^-•co O Tj- O" t^ 10 ci" »o ^ocT cT oi ^ cooo" 10 10 io ^ h" cT cooo'oo' o" ■^lOH 0\-00 O r^ ■* OnnO NO On'^00 CO O h tJ-nq O O N roONCOHt t^io»OONO HSQ w po M Tf 10 O On 10 COOO O ^ w i^ ^ 10 M IH 04 s8| CO O 00 10 cf 00 s-'i.s s.H o s fe ; 2 0-3 J sag ^<<;Mi:qpqMO!J a --oa S oH o S.g "§. 2 « d =* "§^ ^.2 « o ■ ii«=3 ISO'S a o S 9 S^ "■3 d *o -"Fs lUd-eS __ « ..5 5 2 e<» S-.S.S SS:"- sr " d 368 Household Manufactures in the United States 8 ■S 8 > X pq 1 s IS 1 3 5 00 ■2 •1 > 00 Nl 1 11 ! a H cociOOOihmO « O O *M O dddt^-»odd6ooMMtHH ^ M vO »o 1000 O w t^ w^vO vO i-( Oit^iOO^W'O O^^'^O •^ O w O^Tj-iorOM C00*f0 coco OO (Or^t^O*0\M t^O ^ q^ H^ 10 *^ q^'O^vq^ c»,9;^'^..^'^^'^"^'^9i'^^^^ 10 »0 cT "^ tCoo'vo' cT ^ l-r CO d'vO CO ^ *0 lOQO 10 COOO 00 M w r^r^coH 0*0 r^vo t^co vo woo ir^-^coO O^woo H CI 00 CO w w w o^io CO'^^^'^N O OOO 0» OvoO t^ ^ lOCO CO w >0 f^ »o 0\ t^QO O 0» 0» ^vO O* CO H w vO 00 co mm" (-Tc^oTw MhTMCOI-rNNWCIlOWMCOC^ w r^OoO^O vjcocot^cO CO co^O W CO *^ W -^ O^ "^ T^co(Moo ^«^ o t^co 10 to 0\ o o-o o CO lOVO ^^ O" « t^ CO e* O O Ooo Tj-t^iotOM -tj-woo O O -^00 O -^ M O *0 M H ^00 r-^MQO co^oo cs O^-^^M O^COONM COO^ H -O C^ t- t-* t^ Tj-*0 N 0\^ O O* t^vO M M W t^ O Oi'O M W CO W M t^ M M O CO C4 "O cS tn ' /-. /-\ -^ o (/I in •■* H c^S 3rttai!oo3y2«caaS'°a3o35£5'3 The Passing of the Family Factory 369 VO n ^Ti 10 VO O* r^vo H H T^ H CO IH ■i IH M H H w H PO * Th to '(t CO CO M CO VO ■* Ov CO CO OxvO Ko 1000 H H M H H M H M ci CO Oi O ^o Oi-o o> M -^oo w "<*-r^r^ovHco « VO OnoO t^ O CO CO O vo O "jtO i>. w m w CO 10 00" -^ to cT -^ to co\o" ^ocT ^ cT CO ■^00 »o CO ■»? O CO ^ 0\ ^ 'O OvvO cOcOOvO\Tt"W>000 lOvO 0\ Oi M rJ-vO C>) WvOO WOO cocoO OvOvt^tO 00 W CO ^ Tt- CO H W CO VO M M 1000 CO H Ov 00 0 CO ■^ "^VO (NMMO^f'^Ttf^ 10 cO'O "O O OvH wvoH OCOOO \0 l^OlCOt^'^l-t'O MWCI O O \o 10 O 00 M O H .<2 en 3N ■ M d O ma 370 Household Manufactures in the United States TABLE XIX Per Capita Valtte for the Year i860 of Household Manutacttjres IN Cottnties Not Incltided in Table XVIII Ndmber or Counties Ik Per Capita Valtie Ore. Neb. Cal. Minn. Wash. Kan. Utah Nev. N.M. Total Less tlia,Ti $0.26 From $0.26 to $1.00 . . From ii . 01 to $2 . 00 . . From $2 .01 to $3 .00 . . From $3.01 to $4.00 . . From $4 .01 to $5 . 00 . . Above $5 .00 4 S I 3 2 I I 4 I 3 u 3 17 I 2 I I 3 II 6 I 4 6 I I I I ■0 4 I I 46 20 12 3 2 I 7 Total 10 7 II 18 7 18 13 I 6 91 GENERALIZATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS A casual examination of the three foregoing tables reveals certain large generalizations relative to the diminu- tion of household manufactures after 1840. The important ones are: (i) the wholesale discontinuance of the system by i860 in the New England, the Middle States, and Maryland, and the Northwest Territory, there b^ing but 8 Counties out of 62 in New England with a per capita value of $1.00 or more, 3 out of 149 in the second group, and 49 out of 398 in the third. Thus it becomes evident that in the 609 counties in these sections household manufactures were almost wholly superseded between 1840 and i860 by factory-made goods, there being at the latter date but 221, or more than one-third of all the counties, in which the per capita value did not exceed ten cents. (2) In Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, and Missouri The Passing of the Family Factory 371 there was a heavy proportional decrease, but not the practical discontinuance, as in the three foregoing sections. For example, out of the 376 counties in these states in 1840, 228 had a per capita value of $2.00 or more; and in i860 there were but 105 of these same counties with a like value. While there were more states in this group with a per capita value of $2.00 or more than in those in the foregoing groups, yet, since there were so many counties here with a rather high per capita value in 1840, the pro- portional decrease was greater than in the former. (3) In North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama, Arkansas, and Mississippi there was the least discontinuance of the manufacturing of textiles within the family. Out of a total of 262 counties in 1840 there were 159 with a per capita value of $2 ,00 or more. This number had decreased to but 125 in i860, there being an actual per capita increase between these dates in North Carolina, and a decrease of but 7 cents in Mississippi, 62 cents in Tennessee, 91 in Alabama, and a per capita value of more than $2.00 in each of them in i860. (4) The system never assumed the importance in Louisiana, Florida, Texas, Iowa, CaU- fornia, Minnesota, Oregon, and the remaining sections of the country settled between 1840 and i860 that it did in all the foregoing regions, the per capita value in 1840 in Louisiana being but 18 cents; in Florida but 37; Iowa, 60; and in i860 but 97 cents in Texas, 8 in California, 5 in Minnesota, and 88 in Oregon. Table XIX brings out the truth of this generalization more adequately than the foregoing figures by uncovering the fact that 46 of the 91 counties represented therein had in i860 a per capita 372 Household Manufactures in the United States value of less than 26 cents. An additional fact is also established by this table, when it is considered in con- junction with Table XVIII, that, in i860, recency of establishing a given community bore little or no relation to the amoimt of manufacturing done in the home, the relatively high per capita values in certain counties in Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky, and North Carolina and the very low ones in most of those in Miimesota, Oregon, and Kansas proving this. Various factors must be considered in interpreting and accounting for the foregoing general conclusions and certain other facts exhibited by the tables. The one big factor in all this change was the era of unprecedented prosperity and industrial expansion that the country enjoyed during the two decades after 1840. A series of good crops, prodigious commercial activity, an improved financial system, a large intersectional trade, the firm establishment of the factory system, the enormous increase in inland transportation facilities through the building of canals and railroads, the rise in the price of farm produce and a corresponding fall in the price of factory-made goods, the manufacture and introduction of modern farm imple- ments, all working conjomtly, made it possible for the people in all sections of the country where these factors operated to put aside their primitive implements, costumes, and food for mill- and factory-made goods of all descrip- tions. Western farmers became well-to-do, replacing their log cabins with frame houses and their homespun with the finer goods of the East; the once surplus supply of labor in the urban homes secured employment in the mills and The Passing of the Family Factory 373 factories, and the southern plantation-owners found it more profitable to engage their slaves in the fields than in plantation manufacturing, since there was such an increased demand for their staple products.' It would lead this discussion too far afield to give details regarding the foregoing factors which were respon- sible for the passing of the family system of manufacturing. In fact, details seem quite unnecessary, for when one considers the facts that the value of manufactures in the United States increased nearly tenfold during the five decades just prior to i860, while the population increased but four and one-half fold;^ that the price of wheat increased from 56 cents a bushel (wholesale at Cincinnati) in 1830 to $1.03 in 1858, and corn from 20 to 70 cents a bushel during the same time;^ that the railroad mileage increased from 8,589.79 miles in 1850 to 31,196.25 miles in i860; that there were 5,428.05 miles of canal and river improvements in the country in i860;'' that ready-made clothing and improved farm machinery were in the reach of the majority, and a number of other industrial changes equally as far-reaching, the reasons for what happened to the family factory dliring these decades become evident and need no exposition. ' For an excellent discussion of this era of prosperity, see Dodd, Expansion and Conflict, chap. x. " Eighth Census of the U.S., "Manufactures," Preliminary View, p. v. 3 Gephart, Transportation and Internal Development in the Middle West, p. 264. * Eighth Census of the U.S., "Mortahty and Miscellaneous Statistics,'' pp. 331. 33S f- 374 Household Manufactures in the United States The close relation between the operation of the fore- going factors in any given section of the country and the discontinuance or maintenance of the family factory accounts for the four general conclusions listed above. In the states covered by the first generalization these factors were present in abundance, hence an all but dis- continuance of family manufacturing by i860; while in states where they were not present to any considerable extent, like Tennessee, North Carolina, Arkansas, Alabama, and Mississippi, there was on the whole Uttle or no diminu- tion in the amount of household manufacturing between 1840 and 1860/ The influence that some or all of the foregoing factors had in diminishing the amount of goods made in the home is as evident in a single state as in a larger area. A study of the location of the counties in Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, and Tennessee with respect to trans- portation facilities alone and of their corresponding per capita values of household manufactures in i860 reveals this fact. As a general rule, aU the counties with a high per capita value in these states were those unfavorably located with reference to rivers, canals, and railroads, and counties with a low per capita, those favorably located in this respect. For example, in North Carolina, Macon County had a per capita value of $8.64 in i860; Yancey, ' For the number of manufacturing establishments in each state in the Union in i860, as well as the products made and their value, the number of miles of railroads and canals, see Eighth Census of the U.S., "Manu- factures," and "Mortality and Miscellaneous Statistics"; also Gephatt, op. cit.; Tanner, Canals and Railroads of the U.S. (1840); and Dunbar, Hist, of Travel in Am., IV, Apps. A and B. The Passing oj the Family Factory 375 $5 .00; and Ashe, $5 .00. In Tennessee, at the same date, Roane County had a per capita value of $11.46; Wilson, $8.52; Cannon, $7.20; Dekalb, $8.73; and Henderson, $8.45 — all being out-of-the-way counties which things modern had not yet reached. The converse of this situa- tion was found in counties like Berkeley, Clarke, Elizabeth City, and Westmoreland in Virginia; Hyde, Carteret, Martin, and Mecklenburg in North Carolina; Shelby, Davidson, and Montgomery in Tennessee; and Campbell, Jefferson, and McCracken in Kentucky — aU favorably located with reference 16 trade and transportation faciUties. While there was occasionally an exception to the general rule, yet on the whole there was a direct relation between the discontinuance or maintenance of the family system of manufacturing within a given county and its location with respect to the factors which made possible the great era of prosperity that the country of 1850-60 enjoyed.' To account for the last general conclusion based on the foregoing tables, namely, that in i860 the recency of establishing a given community bore Httle or no relation to the amount of manufacturing done in the home, is not difficult. The situation as it existed in new settlements between 1850 and i860 was quite the reverse of what it was in, say, 1810, when the settlements were made first and a demand for things modern was created by them; while after 1850, or even before in certain sections, the ' For the location of counties in 1850, see Colton's General Atlas (1857). In Clark's Hist, of Manufactures in the U.S. there is a table showing relation of population and railway mileage to the value of manufactures produced in shops and factories and in households in 1840, 1850, i860. For this table see Appendix XII. 376 Household Manufactures in the United States settlements were preceded and induced by modern improve- ments, for which reason it was not necessary for them to pass through the primitive pioneer stage as those made earlier in the century were forced to do. Coming as they did in such large numbers after 1820 was also economically advantageous to the western emigrants, for the demand for factory-made goods made it profitable to provide ways and means to secure them. These were found either in increased transportation facilities or in the setting up of manufacturing establishments in the several localities. Such in brief is an explanation of the low per capita values in the western states and territories in i860, which in turn signaled the final passing of the family system of manufacturing, for when the system ceased to move westward with the new settlements and at the same time was being crowded out of many sections of the country east of the Mississippi it ceased to exist except locally. The foregoing three tables show that by i860 the system had either entirely disappeared or was rapidly disappearing; hence the reason for closing the discussion here. While it is true that it lingered locally for years after i860, and was quite generally revived in the South during the Civil War, yet as a factor in the economic life and prosperity of the country as a whole it was practically nil at the end of the sixth decade of the nineteenth century. BIBLIOGRAPHY Because of the space which they would have consumed out of all proportion to their value, many items have been omitted from this bibliography. Particularly is this true of the section on local histories, where less than one-tenth of the volumes carefully examined and used to some extent appear. In fact, a very small percentage of the volumes examined are listed in any section, for the charac- ter of the material in them made a careful selection necessary to avoid unnecessary duplications. Where practically the same data were found in several accoxmts, which was often the case in town and county histories, only the best ones have been included. The list presented below aims to contain ample authority for all the facts, opinions, and conclusions found in the entire discussion. A. PRIMARY SOURCES I. COLONIAL, STATE AND NATIONAL LAWS, RECORDS, ARCHIVES, AND DOCUMENTS Anjou, Gustave. Ulster County, New York, Probate Records, "Wills." Vol. II. New York, 1906. Connecticut: Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut (1636-1776). Compiled by J. H. Trumbull and C. J. Hoadly. 15 vols. Hartford, 1850-90. Two additional volumes of State Records (1776-80). Hartford, 1894-95- Coxe, Tench. "Digest of Manufactures," in American State Papers, "Finance," II, 666 ff.; exists also in a separate volume. Phila- delphia, 1814. 377 378 Household Manufactures in the United States Delaware: Laws of the State of Delaware. Printed by M. Bradford and R. Porter. Vol. IV. Wilmington, 1816. Journal of the House of Representatives, 1808. Gallatin, Albert. "Report on Manufactures, Communicated to the House of Representatives, April 19, 1810," in American State Papers, "Finance," II, 425 ff. Georgia: Colonial Records of the State of Georgia (1732-74). Edited by A. D. Candler. 17 vols. Atlanta, 1904-6. Hamilton, Alexander. "Report on Manufactures, Communicated to the House of Representatives, December 5, 1791," in American State Papers, "Finance," I, 123 ff. Hamilton Papers for i^go-pi (MSS). Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress. Among these papers are found the original reports on which Hamilton based his famous general account of 1 79 1. Many of the individuals who were asked to report went into considerable detail concerning household manufactures in their respective communities. Maine : Documentary History of the State of Maine. Maine Historical Society Collections, 2d series. 16 vols. Portland, 1869-1910. Maryland: Archives of Maryland. Edited by W. H. Browne and Clayton Cohnan. 34 vols. Baltimore. 1883-1914. Laws of Maryland (i 704-1809). Edited by Virgil Maxcy. 3 vols. Baltimore, 1811. Massachusetts: Records of the Governor and Company of the Massa- chusetts Bay in New England (1628-86). Edited by N. B. Shurtleff. 5 vols. Boston, 1853-54. Acts and Resolves, Public and Private, of the Province of Massa- chusetts Bay (1692-1780). 17 vols. Boston, 1869-1910. Acts and Laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (1780-81 and 1784-85). Boston, 1781 and 1784. Reprinted, 1890. New Hampshire: Documents and Records Relating to the Province, Town, and State of New Hampshire (1623-1800). Edited by N. Bouton and others. 31 vols. Concord, etc., 1867-1907. Laws of New Hampshire (1697-1745). Edited by A. S, Batchellor. 2 vols. Manchester and Concord, 1904 and 1913. Bibliography 379 New Jersey: Archives of the State of New Jersey. Edited by W. A. Whitehead and others, ist series, Documents Relating to the Colonial History (1631-1800). 27 vols.; 2d series, Documents Relating to the Revolutionary History (1776-80). 4 vols. Newark, Paterson, and Trenton, 1880-1914. New York: Documents Relative to the Colonial History of New York. EditedbyE. B. O'CallaghanandB. Femow. 15 vols. Albany, 1856-87. Lavus of New York. 31st, 33d, 3Sth, 40th, 42d, and 43d sessions of the Assembly in the years 1808, 1810, 1812, 1816, 1819, and 1820. Documentary History of the State of New York. E. B. O'Callaghan. 4 vols. Albany, 1849-51. Censuses of the State of New York for the Years 1821 and 1825, in Journal of the Assembly of New York, 45th Session. Albany, 1822, Appendix A; and New York Senate Journal, 49th Ses- sion. Albany, 1826, Appendix A. Censuses of the State of New York for the Years 183s, 1845, i^SS- Albany, 1826, 1836, 1857. North Carolina: Colonial Records of North Carolina (1662-1776). Edited by W. L. Saunders. 10 vols. Raleigh, 1886-90. State Records of North Carolina (1776-90). Edited by Walter Clark. Vols. XI-XXVI. Winston and Goldsboro, 1895-1906. Pennsylvania: Colonial Records (1683-1790). Published by the State. Philadelphia and Harrisburg, 1851-53. Archives. 4th series. Edited by G. E. Reed. Vol. III. Harris- burg, 1900. Statutes at Large. Vol. Ill, 1712-24. Compiled by J. T. Mitchell and Henry Flanders. Harrisburg, 1896. Pickering, Danby. Statutes at Large, from Magna Charta to ... . 1761. Continued by Pickering and others to 1807. 46 vols. Cambridge, 1762-1807. Much use made of Vols. X, XI, XIII, XIV, XX, XXX, XXXIII, XXXIV. Providence: Early Records of the Town of Providence, R.L. Vols. I-XX. Providence, 1892-1909. 380 Household Manufactures in the United States Plymouth: Records of the Colony of New Plymouth in New England (1620-92). Edited by N. B. Shurtleff and others. 12 vols. Boston, 1855-61. Rhode Island: Records of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantation in New England (1636-1792). CompUed by J. R. Bartlett. 10 vols. Providence, 1856-65. South Carolina: Statutes at Large. Edited by T. Cooper and D. J. McCord. 10 vols. Coliimbia, 1836-41. United States: The Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America. Edited by Richard Peters. Vols. I, II, and III. Boston, 1854-61. Annals of Congress, lySg-gi, Vol. I. Compiled by Joseph Gales. Washington, 1834; also i6th Congress, 1st Session. Vol. II, column 2041. Journal of the Continental Congress (17 74-82) . Library of Congress edition. Edited by W. C. Ford. 23 vols. Washington, 1904-14. Executive Documents, ist Session, 22d Congress, 1831-32. Documents Relative to the Manufactures in the United States. Collected and transmitted to the House of Representatives, in compliance with a resolution of January 19, 1832, by the Sec- retary of the Treasury. 2 vols. Washington, 1833. Eighth Census of the United States (i860). "Manufactures," "Mortality and Miscellaneous Statistics," "Agriculture," and "Population." Compendium of the Enumeration of the Inhabitants of the United States, etc., from the returns of the Sixth Census (1840). Wash- ington, 1841. The Seventh Census of the United States (1850). Washington, 1853. Vermont: Records of the Council of Safety and Council of the State of Vermont. Edited by E. P. Walton. 8 vols. Montpelier, 1873-80. Virginia: Hening, W. H., The Statutes-at-Large, being a Collection of all the Laws of Virginia (1619-1792). 13 vols. Various editions. Much use made of Vols. I, II (New York, 1823), and III (Philadelphia, 1823). Bibliography 381 n. CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTS American Husbandry. Containing an account of the soil, climate, productions, and agriculture of the British colonies in North America and the West Indies. By an American. 2 vols. London, 1775. Acrelius, Israel. A History of New Sweden; or The Settlements on the Delaware River. Stockholme, 1758. Translated from the Swedish by W. M. Reynolds. Philadelphia, 1874. Anburey, Thomas. Travels through the Interior Parts of America in a Series of Letters. 2 vols. London, 1791. Anonymous. "The Present State of the Colony of West Jersey, in America, September, Anno Dom. 1681," in Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography. Vol. XVIII. Philadelphia, 1894. Ashe, Thomas. Travels in America Performed in 1806. London, 1808. Baily, Francis. Journal of a Tour, ijgd &• ijgj. London, 1866. Bassett, J. S. (editor). The Writings of Colonel William Byrd. New York, 1901. "Belknap Papers," Part II, in Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, sth series. Vol. III. Boston, 1877. Beverly, R. The History and Present State of Virginia. London, 1705. Brock, R. A. (editor). "The Official Letters of Alexander Spots- wood," in Collections of the Virginia Historical Society. New Series, Vols. I and II. Richmond, 1882. Budd, Thomas. Good Order Established in Pennsylvania and New Jersey in America. Printed in 1685. A reprint from the original, edited by J. F. Shepard. Cleveland, Ohio, 1902. Burnaby, Andrew. Travels through the Middle Settlements in North America, in the Years 17 sg and 1760. With Observations upon the State of the Colonies. Second edition, London, 1775. Burke, Edmund. An Account of the European Settlements in America. 2 vols, in one. London, 1757. Crevecceur, St. John de. Letters from an American Farmer, Describ- ing Certain Provincial Situations, Manners, and Customs, and 382 Household Manufactures in the United States Conveying Some Idea of the State of the People of North America. Written to a Friend in England by J. Hector St. John, a farmer of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia, 1793. Cummings, F. Sketch of a Tour to the Western Country, 1808, i8og, in Thwaites, Early Western Trawls. Vol. IV. Cleveland, Ohio, 1904. Denton, Daniel. A Brief Description of New York Formerly Called New Netherlands. A reprint from the original edition of 1670 by Burrows Brothers Company. Cleveland, Ohio, 1902. Doddridge, Joseph. Notes on the Settlements and Indian Wars of the Western Parts of Virginia and Pennsylvania from 1763 to 1783, Inclusive, Together with a Review of the State of Society and Manners of the First Settlers of the Western Country. Pittsburgh, Pa., 1912. First edition was in 1824. Drake, Daniel. Pioneer Life in Kentucky. A series of reminiscential letters from Daniel Drake to his children. Edited by his son, C. D. Drake. Cincinnati, 1870. Drayton, John. A View of South Carolina. Charleston, 1802. Duncan, R. B. "Old Settlers Papers," in Indiana Historical Society Publications. Vol. II, No. 10. Indianapolis, 1895. Duncan came to Indiana in 1820. The foregoing papers were written for the Indianapolis Herald and appeared in the issues of January II, 18, 25, and February r, 1879. Dwight, Timothy. Travels in New England' and New York. Vol. II. New Haven, Conn., 1821. EUicott, Andrew. The Journal. Philadelphia, 1814. EUicott was commissioned by the government to run the boimdary between the southern part of the United States and Spain. He worked at this during the years 1797, 1798, 1799, and 1800. The Journal was kept during these years. Finch, J. G. " Settlement of Noblesville, Hamilton County, Indiana," in Indiana Quarterly Magazine of History. Vol. VI. Indianapolis, 1910. Finch was nine years old when his father came to Indiana in 1819. In 1893 he wrote the account of the founding of the settlement. Bibliography 383 Ford, Thomas. A History of Illinois from Its Commencement as a State in 1814 to 1847. Chicago, 1854. A contemporary account by a rather impwrtant citizen of Illinois during the years covered by his history. A Description of South Carolina. London, 1761. Authorship attributed to Governor James Glen. Goodrich, S. G. Recollections of a Life Time or Men and Things I Have Seen. 2 vols. New York, 1856. An account of New England Ufa during the first quarter of the nineteenth century. Harris, T. M. The Journal of a Tour into the Territory Northwest of the Alleghany Mountains. Boston, 1805. "Diary of John Harrower, 1773-76," in American Historical Remew. Vol. VI. New York, 1901. Hodgson, Adam. Letters from North America Written during a Tour in the United States and Canada. 2 vols. London, 1824. Much of this material is also in Remarks during a Journey through North America in the Years i8ig, 1820, and 1821. By the same author. New York, 1823. Holmes, Isaac. An Account of the United States of America, derived from actual observations during a residence of four years in that republic. London, 1823. Hoppin, Ruth. "Personal Recollections of Pioneer Days," in Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections. Vol. XXXVIII. Lansing, 191 2. Miss Hoppin was three years old when her father moved to Michigan in 1836. The foregoing was written in 1893. Howells, W. C. Recollections of Life in Ohio, from 1813 to 1840. Cindnnati, 1895. Written between 1880 and 1894. Revised and published by W. D. HoweUs, his son, after the father's death. Imlay, Gilbert. A Topographical Description of the Western Territory of North America. An account of population, agriculture, manners, and customs. Third edition. London, 1797. Jameson, J. F. (editor). "Letters of Phineas Bond," in Reports of the American Historical Association. 1896, Vol. I, and 1897. The letters cover the years 1787-94. 384 Household Manufactures in the United States Jefferson, Thomas. Notes on the State of Virginia. London, 1787. Contains a brief account of manufactures in 1781. . Works. Federal edition. Edited by P. L. Ford. 12 vols. New York, 1904-5. Johnson, Edward. Wonder-Working Providence, 1628-1651. Edited by J. F. Jameson. Original Narrative of Early American History Series. New York, 1910. Jones, Hugh. The Present State of Virginia. London, 1824. (Sabin's reprints, No. 5. New York, 1865.) Kalm, Peter. Travels into North America (1748-49). Translated into English by J. R. Forster. Second edition. 2 vols. London, 1772. Lawson, John. The History of North Carolina, Containing the Exact Description and Natural History of That Country. London, 1714. Martzolff, C. L. (editor). "Reminiscences of a Pioneer," in The Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society Publications. Vol. XIX. Columbus, 1910. The pioneer was Thomas Rogers, who moved from Virginia to Kentucky in 1795. Melish, John. Travels in the United States of America in 1806, 1807, i8og, 1810 and 1811. 2 vols. London, 1818. Michaux, F. A. Travels to the West of the Alleghany Mountains in the Year 1802, in Thwaites, Early Western Travels. Vol. III. Cleveland, Ohio, 1904. "New England's First Fruits" (London, 1643), in Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, ist series. Vol. I. Boston, 1806. A reprint of the edition of 1792. Ohnsted, F.. L. A Journey in the Back Country. New York, i860. "A Relation or Journal of a Plantation Settled at Pl3rmouth in New England and Proceedings Thereof." First printed in 1622. Original probably written by one of the Company. Reprint from Purchas' Pilgrims, Book X, chapter iv, in Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, ist series. Vol. VIII. Boston, 1810. A reprint of the edition of 1794. Bibliography 385 "Representation of the Board of Trade to the House of Lords, etc., January 1733-34," in Connecticut Historical Society Collections. Vol. V, 445 fif. Hartford, 1896. Rejmolds, John. My Own Times: Embracing Also The History of My Life. Chicago, 1879. Weld, Isaac. Travels through the States of North America and the Province of Upper and Lower Canada during the Years 1795, 1796, and 1797. Fourth edition. London, 1800. Welsh, Mary J. "Recollections of Pioneer Life in Mississippi," in Mississippi Historical Society Publications. Vol. IV. Oxford, 1901. "The Case of Good Intent," Annapolis, 1770. Authorship attrib- uted to Stephen West. Reprint from a transcript of the original in Maryland Historical Magazine. Vol. III. Baltimore, 1908. Wilkeson, Samuel, "Recollections of the West," in Publications of the Bufalo Historical Society. Vol. V. Buffalo, 1902. Winthrop, John. History of New England. Edited by J. K. Hosmer. Original Narrative of Early American History Series. 2 vols. New York, 1908. in. PRIMARY SOURCES OP A GENERAL NATURE American Museum. Mathew Carey, Printer and Editor. 13 vols. The first twelve extend from January, 1787, to December, 1792. The thirteenth was pubUshed in 1798. American Pioneer. 2 vols. 1842 and 1843. Edited and published by John S. Williams. Cincinnati, Ohio. Board of Trade Papers, Proprieties. Transcripts in Pennsylvania Historical Society, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Commons, J. R., and others. Documentary History of Ameri- can Industrial Society. Vols. I and H. Cleveland, Ohio, 1910-11. De Bow, J. D. B . Industrial Resources of the South and West. 3 vols. New Orleans, 1852-53. 386 Household Manufactures in the United States Force, Peter. Collection of Tracts and Other Papers. 4 vols. Wash- ington, 1838. Hazard, Samuel. Register of Pennsylvania. Vol. II. Philadelphia, 1828. Macpherson, David. Annals of Commerce, Manufactures, Fisheries, and Navigation. 4 vols. London, 1805. Much use made of ' Vols. II, III, and IV. Niles' Weekly Register. 75 vols. Baltimore, 1811-49. Much use made of Vols. I, VI, VII, IX, X, XI, XII, XVII, XX, XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV, and XXXIX. Pitkin, Timothy. A Statistical View of the Commerce of the United States in Connection with Agriculture and Manufactures. Hart- ford, Conn., 1816. . A Statistical View of the Commerce of the United States of America, Including an Account of Banks, Manufactures, and Internal Trade and Improvements. New Haven, Conn., 1835- Reichel, W. C. Memorials of the Moravian Church. Vol. I. Phila- delphia, 1870. Saxby, Henry. The British Customs; containing an historical and practical account of each branch of that revenue; the rates of mer- chandise, as settled by the 12th of Car. II, cap. 4, and 11 Geo. I, cap. 7. London, 1757. Seybert, Adam. Statistical Annals. Philadelphia, 1818. Transactions of the Albany Institute. Vol. IV. Albany, 1858-64. Contains an account of the premiimis awarded by law in New York for the encouragement of household manufacture of woolen cloth. Transactions of the Society for the Promotion of Useful Arts. New York State. Vol. III. Albany, 1814. This society and the Albany Lyceum of Natural History were united in 1824 to form the Albany Institute. Whitworth, Sir Charles. State of the Trade of Great Britain in Its Imports and Exports, i6gy-iTJ3. London, 1776. Bibliography 387 B. SECONDARY AUTHORITIES I. GENERAL SECO^rDARY WORKS Bagnall, W. R. The Textile Industries of the United Slates. Vol. I, 1639-1810. Cambridge, Mass., 1893. Bishop, J. L. A History of American Manufactures from 1608 to i860. 3 vols. Philadelphia, 1861-68. BoUes, A. S. Industrial History of the United States. Third edition. Norwich, Conn., 1881. Brown, J. H. (editor-in-chief). Textile Industries of the United States. Vol. I. Boston, 1911. CaUender, G. S. Selections from the Economic History of the United States, 1763-1860. ' New York, 1909. Clark, V. 8. History of Manufactures in the United States, 1607- 1860. Washington, D. C, 1916. Colton, G. W. General Atlas. New York, 1857. Coman, Katharine. Industrial History of the United States. New York, 1907. Coxe, Tench. A View of the United States of America. Philadelphia, 1794. Contains a series of papers written at various times between 1787 and 1794; also some documents. Coxe was for a time Assistant Secretary of the Treasury. Dodd, W. E. Expansion and Conflict. New York, 1915. Douglas, WiUiam. A Summary Historical and Political of the First Planting, Progressive Improvements, and Present State of the British Settlements in North America. 2 vols. London, 1765- Dunbar, Seymour. A History of Travel in America. Vol. IV, Appendixes A and B. Indianapolis, Ind., 1915. Earle, Alice Morse. Home Life in Colonial Days. New York, igo6. Faust, A. B. The German Element in the United States. 2 vols. Boston, 1909. Fessenden, T. G. Register of Arts. Philadelphia, 1808. Hall, James. Romance of Western History. Cincinnati, 1885. 388 Household Manufactures in the United States Hanna, C. A. The Scotch-Irish, or the Scotch in North Britain, North Ireland, and North America. 2 vols. New York, 1902. Hildreth, S. P. Pioneer History: Being an Account of the First Examination of the Ohio Valley and the Early Settlement of the North West Territory. Cincinnati, 1848. Holmes, Abiel. American Annals, or a Chronological History of America. 2 vols. Cambridge, Mass., 1805. Howard, G. E. Preliminaries of the Revolution, in American Nation Series. New York, 1905. Hubbard, William. A General History of New England from the Discovery to MDCLXXX; second edition collated with original manuscript; in Massachusetts Historical Society Collections. 2d series. Vols. V-VT. Boston, 1848. The first edition was printed in 1815 by the same society. Kittredge, G. L. The Old Farmer and His Almanac. Being Some Observations on Life and Manners in New England a Hundred Years Ago, Suggested by Reading the Early Number of Mr. Robert B. Thomas's Farmer's Almanac. Boston, 1904. Rogers, J. E. T. History of Agriculture and Prices in England, isSQ-i^gj. 7 vols. Oxford, England, 1 866-1 902. Roosevelt, Theodore. Winning of the West. 4 vols. New York, 1889-96. Smith, H. E. Colonial Days and Ways. New York, 1900. Strickland, W. P. Autobiography of Rev. James B. Finley, or Pioneer Life in the West. Cincinnati, 1854. Swank, J. M. History of the Manufacture of Ironin All Ages. Second edition. Philadelphia, 1892. Tanner, H. S. A Description of the Canals and Railroads in the United States. New York, 1840. Weeden, W. B. Economic and Social History of New England, 1620-178Q. 2 vols. Boston, 1890. Winterbotham, W. An Historical, Geographical, Commercial, and Philosophical View of the United States of America and of the European Settlements in America and the West Indies. 4 vols. New York, 1796. Bibliography 389 n. MONOGRAPHS AND ARTICLES Abbott, Edith. Women in Industry. New York, 1910. Beer, G. L. The Commercial Policy of England toward the American Colonies, in " Columbia University Studies in History, Economics and Public Law." Vol. Ill, No. 2. New York, 1893. Clark, Victor, "Colonial Manufactures," in The South in the Building of the Nation. Vol. V. J. C. Ballagh (editor). Richmond, 1909. Dexter, F. B. "Estimates of Population in American Colonies," in Proceedings of American Antiquarian Society. New Series, Vol. V. Worcester, Mass., 1889. DufEeld, G. C. "Pioneer Mills in Iowa," in Annals of Iowa. 3d series, Vol. VI. Des Moines, 1903-5. Durrett, R. T. "The State of Kentucky; Its Discovery, Settlement, and Progress for a Hundred Years," in Filson Club Publications, No. 7. Louisville, 1892. . "The First Act in the Siege of Bryant's Station," in Filson Club Publications, No. 12. Louisville, 1897. Gephart, W. F. Transportation and Industrial Development in the Middle West. New York, 1909. Giesecke, A. A. American Commercial Legislation before lySg, University of Pennsylvania, Publications in Political Economy and Public Law. New York, 1910. Goodwin, F. P. "Rise of Manufactures in Miami County, Ohio," in American Historical Review. Vol. XII, No. 4, 1907. Haines, James. " Social Life and Scenes in the Early Settlement of Southern Illinois," in Transactions of the Illinois State Historical Society, No. 10. Springfield, 1906. Hall, G. S. "Boy Life in a Massachusetts Town Thirty Years Ago," in Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society. Vol. VII. Worcester, Mass., 1892. Heatwole, CorneUus. "Hand- Weaving in Rockingham County, Virginia," in Wayland, History of Rockingham County. Dayton, Va., 191 2. An excellent account of the process of weaving on the handloom. 390 Household Manufactures in the United States Hubbard, L. M. "Manufacturing Interests of Wallingford," in New England States. Vol. II. Boston, 1897. Hunter, W. H. "The Pathfinders of Jefferson County," in Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society Publications. Vol. VI. Columbus, Ohio, 1898. Lippincott, Isaac. A History of Manufactures in the Ohio Valley to the Year i860. New York, 1914. . "Pioneer Industry in the West," in Journal of Political Economy. Vol. XVIII. Chicago, 1910. Lord, E. L. Industrial Experiments in the British Colonies of North America, in "Johns Hopkins University Studies." Extra Vol. XVII. Baltimore, 1898. McMath, J. M. "The Willow Run Settlement," in Michigan Pioneer and Historical Society Collections. Vol. XIV. Lansing, 1890. Morriss, M. S. Colonial Trade of Maryland, idSg-iyis, in "Johns Hopkins University Studies." Vol. XXXII, No. 3. Baltimore, 1914. North, S. N. D. "New England Wool Manufactures," in The New England States. Vol. I. Boston, 1897. Parker, B. S. "Pioneer Life," in Indiana Magazine of History. Vol. Ill, No. I. Indianapolis, 1907. Parker was an old resident of Henry County, Indiana. The articles were intended to form parts of his history of Henry County. They date back into the twenties. Patterson, R. W. "Early Society in Southern Illinois," in Fergus Historical Series. Vol. I, No. 14. Chicago, 1880. Perley, Sidney. "The Manufacture of Nails in Essex County, Massachusetts," in Essex Antiquarian. Vol. II, No. 5. Salem, Mass., 1898. . "Shoemaking," in Essex Antiquarian. Vol. V, No. 4. Salem, Mass., 1901. Philbrick, Eliza. "Spinning in the Olden Time," in Essex Anti- quarian. Vol. I, No. 6. Salem, Mass., 1897. Rabbeno, Ugo. The American Commercial Policy. Second edition (translation). London, 1895. Bibliography 391 Rush, Benjamin. Essays, Literary, Moral and Philosophical. Phila- delphia, 1794. . An Account of the Manners of the German Inhabitants of Pennsylvania Written in ijSg. Notes added by I. D. Rupp in 1875. Reprint of the original in Pennsylvania German Society Proceedings and Addresses. Vol. XIX. Lancaster, Pa., 1908. Schultz, T. First Settlement of Germans in Maryland. Frederick, 1896. A paper read before the Frederick County Historical Society, January 17, 1896. Swank, J. M. "The Manufacture of Iron in New England," in The New England States. Vol. I. Boston, 1897. Tyson, M. E. "A Brief Account of the Settlement of Ellicott's Mills," in Maryland Historical Society Publications. Vols. I-VI, No. 4. Baltimore, 1865. Vogel, WiUiam. "Home Life in Early Indiana," in Indiana Maga- zine of History. Vol. X, Nos. 2 and 3. Bloomington, Ind., 1914. Welker, Martin. "Farm Life in Central Ohio Sixty Years Ago," in Western Reserve Historical Society Tracts. Vol. IV, Tract No. 86. Cleveland, Ohio, 1895. Wheeler, C3Tenus. "Inventors and Inventions of Cayuga Coimty, New York," in Cayuga County Historical Society Collections, No. 2, 1882. Williams, M. C. "The Homespun Age," in Magazine of American History with Notes and Queries. Vol. XXV. New York, 1891. Woodward, Henry. "Manufacturing Interests of Hartford," in New England States. Vol. II. Boston, 1897. Wright, C. D. "The Factory System of the United States," in Tenth Census of the United States (1880), "Report on Manu- factures," pp. 533-611. ni. STATE AND LOCAL HISTORIES Anderson, P. W. Counties of Warren, Benton, Jasper, and Newton. Indiana. Chicago, 1883. Arnold, S. G. History of Rhode Island and Providence Plantation, 1636-1790. 2 vols. New York, i860. 392 Household Manufactures in the United States Atkinson, G. W. History of Kanawha County, from Its Organization in lySg until the Present Time, Embracing the Accounts of Early Settlements, and Thrilling Adventures with the Indians. Charles- ton, W. Va., 1876. Baird, C. W. History of Rye, Westchester County, New York, 1660- 1870. New York, 187 1. A chapter on manners and customs in 1680. Bigelow, E. V. Narrative History of the Town of Cohasset, Massa- chusetts. PubUshed by the Town, 1898. Good discussion of "Industries and Firesides." Blood, H. A. History of Temple, New Hampshire. Boston, i860. Booth, M. L. History of the City of New York from Its Earliest Settlement to the Present Time. New York, 1863. Bourne, E. E. The History of Wells and Kennebunk, Maine, from Earliest Settlement to 1820. Portland, Me., 1875. Bouton, Nathaniel. History of Concord, New Hampshire. Concord, 1856. Brown, Warren. History oj the Town of Hampton Falls, New Hamp- shire, 1640 to igoo. Manchester, 1900. Bruce, P. A. Economic History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century. 2 vols. New York, 1896. A chapter in Vol. II on "Manu- factured Supplies — Domestic." Callahan, J. M. History of West Virginia. Pubhshed by the Semi-Centennial Commission of West Virginia, 1913. Contains an excellent chapter on "Industrial and Social Expansion." Cartmell, T. K. Shenandoah Valley Pioneers and Their Descendants. — A History of Frederick County, Virginia, i7j8-igo8. Win- chester, 1908. A chapter on "Mills and Other Developments." Chase, Benj. History of Old Chester, New Hampshire, from 17 ig to i86g. Auburn, 1869. A fine chapter on the industrial history of the town. Child, W. H. History of the Town of Cornish, New Hampshire, j^dj-igio. 2 vols. Concord, 1911. Claiborne, J. F. H. Mississippi as a Province, Territory, and State. Jackson, 1880. Bibliography 393 Clute, J. J. Annals 0/ Stolen Island, from the Discovery to the Present Time. New York, 1877. Contains an account of domestic life in olden times. Cochrane, W. R., and Wood, G. K. History of Franceston, New Hampshire, lysS-iSgi. Nashua, 1895. Coffin, Joshua. A Sketch of the History of Newbury, Newburyport, and West Newbury, 1635-1845. Boston, 1845. Cogswell, L. N. History of the Town of Henniker, Merrimac County, New Hampshire, 1735 to 1880. Concord, 1880. Cravens, C. E. A History of Mattituck, Long Island, New York. Privately published, igo6. Good chapter on "Life in Mattituck in 1700." Donovan, D., and Woodward, J. A. The History of the Town of Lynderborough, New Hampshire, 1733-1905. Lynderboro, 1906. Good chapter on "The Olden Times." Drake, S. G. The History and Antiquities of Boston, from 1630 to 1770. Boston, 1856. Emery, Edwin. History of Sanford, Maine, 1661-ipoo. Fall River, Mass., 1901. Compiled, edited, and arranged by his son, W. M. Emery. Esarey, Logan. A History of Indiana from Its Exploration to 1850. Indianapolis, Ind., 191s- Felt,J.B. History of I pswich,Essex, and Hamilton. Cambridge, 1834. Ford, A. E. History of the Origin of the Town of Clinton, Massa- chusetts, 1653-1865. Clinton, Mass., 1896. Griffin, S. G. A History of the Town of Keene, New Hampshire. Keene, 1904. Contains some excellent material on "Pioneer Life in Keene." Hatch, W. C. History of Industry, Franklin County, Maine, from Its Earliest Settlement in 1787 Down to the Present Time. Farm- ington, 1893. Hayes, L. S. History of the Town of Rockingham, Vermont. Bellows Falls, 1907. Jackson, J. R. (editor). History of Littleton, New Hampshire. 3 vols. Littleton, 1905. Some excellent material in Vol. I. 394 Household Manufactures in the United States Johnson, Amandus. The Swedish Settlements on the Delaware. 2 vols. University of Pennsylvania, 191 1. Some excellent chapters on social and economic life. Jones, C. C. The History 0} Georgia. 2 vols. Boston, 1833. Judd, Sylvester. History of Hadley, Massachtisetts. Northampton, 1863. Kercheval, Samuel. A History of the Valley of Virginia. Win- chester, Va., 1833. King, Rufus. Ohio, First Fruits of theOrdinance of 1787. New York, 1888. Good chapter on "The Pioneer." Kingman, Bradford. History of North Bridgewater, Plymouth County, Massachusetts, from Its First Settlement to the Present Time with Family Registers. Boston, 1866. . History of Brockton, Massachusetts. Syracuse, New York, 1895. Contains good accounts of early habits and customs, raising and manufacturing flax, and the drink of the colonies. Lapham, W. B. History of Bethel, Formerly Sudbury, Canada, Oxford County, Maine, i768-i8go. Augusta, 1891. Lee, Frances Bazley. New Jersey as a Colony and as a State. 3 vols. New York, 1903. Little, William. History of Weare, New Hampshire, 1735-1888. Lowell, Mass., 1888. Levering, J. H. Historic Indiana. New York, 1909. McDuffee, Franklin. History of the Town of Rochester, New Hamp- shire, from 1722 to i8go. 2 vols. Manchester, 1892. McLellan, H. D. History of Gorham, Maine. Compiled and edited by his daughter, Katharine B. Lewis. Portland, 1903. Macy, Obed. The History of Nantucket, Being a Compendious A ccount of the First Settlement of the Island by the English. Boston, 1835. Martin, F. X. History of Louisiana. New Orleans, 1882. A reprint of the two-volume edition of 1827, continued to 1861 by J. F. Condon. Moore, J. B. History of the Town of Candia, Rockingham County, New Hampshire. Manchester, 1893. Bibliography 395 Mordecai, Samuel. Virginia, Especially Richmond in Bygone Days. Richmond, i860. Musgrove, R. W. History of the Town oj Bristol, Grafton County, New Hampshire. 2 vols. Bristol, 1904. Norton, J. F. The History of Fitzwilliam, 1752-1887. New York, 1888. Nourse, H. S. History of the Town of Harvard, Massachusetts, 1732-18^3. Harvard, 1894. Parker, W. F. History of Wolfehorough, New Hampshire. Cam- bridge, Mass., 1901. Peterson, Edward. History of Rhode Island. New York, 1853. Phelan, James. History of Tennessee. New York, 1889. A chapter on "Manners, Customs, and Mode of Life." Putnam, A. W. History of Middle Tennessee. Nashville, 1859. Ramsay, David. The History of South Carolina from Its First Settle- ment in 1670 to the Year 1808. 2 vols. Charleston, 1809. Raum, J. O. The History of New Jersey from the Earliest Settlement to the Present Time. 2 vols. Philadelphia, 1877. Scharf, J. T., and Westcott, Thompson. History of Philadelphia, 160Q-1884. 3 vols. Philadelphia, 1884. Scott, W. W. History of Orange County, Virginia, 1734-1870. Richmond, 1907. Sheldon, George. A History of Deerfield, Massachusetts. 2 vols. Deerfield, Mass., 1895-96. Sibley, J. L. History of the Town of Union, in the County of Lincoln, Maine, to the Middle of the Nineteenth Century. Boston, 1851- Simms, J. R. History of Schoharie County and Border Wars of New York. Albany, 1845. Smith, Albert. History of the Town of Peterborough, Hillsborough County, New Hampshire. Boston, 1876. A good chapter on "Home Life" and one on "Home Manufactures." Smith, Frank. Narrative History of Dover, Massachusetts. Dover, 1897. Smith, J. E. A. The History of Pittsfield {Berkshire County), Massa- chusetts, from the Year 1800 to the Year 1876. Springfield, 1876. 396 Household Manufactures in the United States Somers, A. N. History of Lancaster, New Hampshire. Concord, 1899. Stoddard, Amos. Sketches Historical and Descriptive of Louisiana. Philadelphia, 181 2. An excellent chapter on "Commerce and Manufactures." Street, G. E. Mount Desert, Maine, A History. Edited by S. A. Eliot. Boston, 1905. Taylor, C. J. History of Great Harrington, Berkshire County, Massa- chusetts. Great Harrington, 1882. Temple, J. H. History of the Town of Whately, Massachusetts, 1660-1781. Boston, 1872. . History of North Brookfield, Massachusetts. Published by the Town, 1887. Thompson, D. P. History of the Town of Montpelier, from the time it was first chartered in 1781 to the year i860. Montpelier, i860. Good chapter on "Life in the Early Days of MontpeUer." Tucker, W. H. History of Hartford, Vermont, July 4, 1761 — April 4, i88g. Burlington, 1889. Some material on customs of "Ye Olden Times." Walker, C. M. History of Athens County, Ohio. Cincinnati, 1869. One of the good county histories. Each township is treated separately. Wayland, J. W. A History of Rockingham County, Virginia. Day- ton, Va., 1912. , The German Element of the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia. Charlottesville, Va., 1907. A good chapter on "Home Life and Industrial Habits." Weeden, W. B. Early Rhode Island. A Social Study of the People. New York, 1910. Weise, A. J. The History of the City of Albany, New York, from the Discovery of the Grea4 River in 1524, by Verazzano, to the Present Time. Albany, 1884. Wells, D. W. and R. F. A History of Hatfield, Massachusetts, 1660- igio. Springfield, 1910. Contains considerable material on the social and industrial development of the town. Bibliography 397 Weston, Thomas. History of the Town of Middleboro, Massachusetts. New York, 1906. A chapter on "Social Custom of the i8th Century." Whittlesey, Charles. Early History of Cleveland, Ohio, Including Original Papers and Other Matter Relating to the Adjacent Country. Cleveland, 1867. Williams, Samuel. Natural and Civil History of Vermont. Walpole, N. H., 1794. Good account of manufactures in Vermont about 1790. Williams, W. W. History of th,e Fire Lands, Comprising Huron and Erie Counties, Ohio. Cleveland, 1879. Winsor, Justin (editor). Memorial History of Boston, 1630-1880. 4 vols. Boston, 1880-81. Wise, J. C. Ye Kingdome of Accawmacke or the Eastern Shore of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century. Richmond, 191 1. Worthen, Mrs. Augusta Harvey, comp. The History of Sutton, New Hampshire. 2 vols. Concord, 1890. INDEX INDEX Agreements: non-consumption, 104; non-exportation, 56, 104 f.; non- importation, S4- Agriculture, Society for the Promo- tion of, S3. Alabama: total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 357 ff. American manufactory, 273. American manufactures, 161, 164. American system, 292. Apple-beer, 83 f . Apple-mill, 82 f. Aprons, 153, 158, 204. Arkansas: total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 363 f. Articles: excluded from the discus- sion, I ff.; list of homemade ones in a store in 1753, 188 f. Arts, Society for the Promotion of, 149 note, 152. Ashes, loi; pot and pearl, 134 f., 166, 188. Ax-handle maker, 241. Ax handles, 237, 241. Back-country, 92; mills in, 257, 297; status of household manu- factures in, 93 f., 104, 112, 183. Balance of trade: against western pioneers, 155; conditions of, in 179s, 143; facts relative to, with Great Britain from 1697-1773, SO note; in favor of southern colonies, 51. Bark: black-oak, 198; hickory, 211. Bartering, an example of, 66 note. Basket, 82, 221. Basket-maker, 261. Beaver skins, premium on, S3. Bed cord, 82; covers, 195, 203. Bedsteads, 156, 223; how made on frontier, 224. Bedticks, 131, 134, 138, 205. Beer, 73, 82, 166, 217. Birchen brooms, 95. Black salts, 23s; price of, 236. Blacksmith, 69 note, 14s note, 156; shops, is6, 161, 190, 24s, 262 f. Blankets, 113 ff., 152, 166, 196, 205. Bleaching, cloth and yam process described, 213, 252. Board of Trade, 23, 24 &., 76, 96, 103 note; Bridger to, 77 f.; Heath- cote to, 89; report of, 18; report of, to Parliament, quoted, 80. Boots, 63, 69, 99, IS7, 166, 198, 200. Bounty. See Premiums. Bounty system, 22, 78; effect of on home manufactures, 23 f. Breeches, 95, 113 note, 200; buck- skin, 19s, 300; makers, 263. Brewers, 119, 156, 262 f. Breweries, 156, 190, 261. Broadcloth, 90, 141; disgrace to wear, S3- Brooms, 66, 84, 145 note, 217, 221; split, 300. 401 402 Household Manufactures in the United States Brushes, 137, 217, 221. Brushmaker, 262. Buckskins, 196, 199. Butter-paddles, 221; homemade, 223. Cabinet-makers, 119, 145, 156, 223, 263; wares, 166. Calfskin, 81 f., 84. Calico, 121, 141, 158. California, total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308. Candle-making, 85. Candles, 85, 145, 166, 217, 295; bayberry, how made, 233. Caps, 153, 158, 166; fox-skin, 196; raccoon skin, 196. Carding, 77, 153. Carding machines, 147 note, 162, 247, 277; number in operation in 1810, 251 f.; price of, 277 note. Cards, 82 ff., loi, 217; and combs, the making of, 218. Carolinas, S7, 112; exports to, and imports from, Great Britain in 1773-76, 58 f.; imports from Great Britain in 1767-69, 56 f.; value of woolen goods exported from England in 1772-75, S7- Carpenters, 69 note, 119, 145, 149, 161, 190, 261. Carpet, 145, 166, 204, 216; chain, 216; making, 215 f. Cattle, 63, 80, 144; price of, in 1640, 4Sf- Cedar-ware, 49, 94. Chairs, 81, 95, 156, 223. Chaise-making, 245; process de- scribed, 228 f. Cheese, 295, 301. Cheese-hoops, 221; how made, 223. Cheese ladders, 221; howmade, 223. Cider, 82 £f., 217, 229, 295, 301; how made, 230 f . Cider-brandy, 229. Cider-making, 85. Cider-mill, 82 £E., 146 note, 301; how made, 230 f. Cider-press, 82 £f. Cloth: implements used in manu- facture of, 217; per capita value of homemade in United States in 1810, 166; per capita yards made in New York in 1820-21, 288 f.; total value of homemade in United States in 1810, 166; total yards made in New York in 1820-21, 288 f. Clothier, General, 113 f. Clothiers' works, 147 note. Clothing, scarcity of, 30. Coats, 114, 125, 196; blankets, IS7. Colorado, total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1830, i860, 309- Coloring and dyeing, materials used, 211 f. Combs, 84, 217. Congress, Continental, 52, 56, 113 f., 164. Connecticut: exemption of sheep from taxation in, 128, 132, 134; Governor Pitkin's report on, loi, 104; household manufactures in 1810, 170, 183, 293; laws relative to linen cloth, hemp, and flax, 36 note; manner of securing clothing for the army, 114; Melish on con- ditions in, 146, 16s; total and per capita value of household manu- factures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 314. Coopers, 69 note, 145 note, 261 ff. Index 403 Cooper-ware, 49, 94, 120, 217. Copperas, 157, 211 f. Com, 44, 100, 261, 29s, 301. Cotton, 78, 96 ff., 103, 120 f., 126, 141 note, 1S3, iSS. 158 ff., 163, 184, 191 ff., 296; bounty on, 133; cards, 42 note; cloth, law to en- courage manufacture of, 29; fac- tory, 274; gin, 158; goods, yards and value in 1810, 169 ff.; naills, 246; operation connected with fabrication of, 206; warp, 205; wool, 83 f. Counterpanes, 99, 131, 203 f. Coverlets, 131, 138, 166, 203. Coverlids, 82, 205. Cowhides, 196 f. Cradles, 223; how made, 225. Dakota, total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309. Daughters of Liberty, $$, 105 f.; account of a meeting of, 107. Delaware, 69, 90, 114; exemption of sheep from taxation in, 148 note; household manufactures, 1790, 136; household manufactures in 1810, 172; sheep in, 192; total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 320. Deerskins, premium on, 53, 69, 82, 9S, 113 note, 155, rS7 f-. i97 f-, 199 note. Dependence, industrial, 142, 186. Distilleries, 156, 190, 301. District of Columbia, total and per capita value of household manu- factures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309. Drawback system, 20 f. Druggets, 66, 70, 78. Duties and drawbacks, system of, 20 f. Dyeing, 145 note, 252. Dyeing business, how advertised, 252 f. Dyepot, 66, 145 note, 212. Edging, 133, 204. Embargo Act; influence of , on West, iSS; policy, 143, 149. England, value of woolen goods from, in 1772-7S. 57- English proprietors, regulations and restrictions favoring, 17. Enumerated articles, restrictions on, 18. Exports: official value of, from colonies to Great Britain, 1773-76, 58; restrictions on, 20; total of colonies, 1769, 51 note; value of woolen goods from England to the colonies, 1772-75, 57. Factory system, 184, 247, 268, 271; birth year of, 274 f. Fair, in New York in 1765, 53. Family factory, 142, 188. Family manufactures, inventions to aid, 277. Felt hat, 113, 114 note. Flails, 236, 241. Flannels, 98, 131, 137, 163; yards in New York in 1820-21, 288 f. Flax, 44, 47, 108, 118, 120, 126 f., 134 ff., 141 note, I4S, 147. IS3 note, ISS, 158, 163, 184, 191 ff.; act to encourage growth of, 127 f.; bounties for raising, 34; brakes, 84,158,208,217,218,301; goods, yards and value, 1810, 1695.; premium on, 36 note, 40, 53, 55, 60, 63, 69, 72 f., 80, 82 ff., 89 f., 95 ff., 100, 103; preparation of, for spinning, 207 f. 404 Household Manufackires in the United States Floating-miUs, how made, 258 note. Florida: total and per capita value ot household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 359 f. Flour, iss, 295. Flour-mills, 246, 257. Foot- wheel, price of, 217. Foreign finery, rage for, 127. Foreign supplies, influx of, 123 £f. Fringe, 134, 153, 166. Frontier communities, 201. Frontier, condition on, during Revo- lution, 119 f., 143, 198. Frontier counties, 183. Frontier settlements, 200. Fulled cloth, yards in New York in 1820-21, 288 f. Fuller, 69 note, 145. Fulling business, how advertised, 250 f. Fulling-mills, 90, 152, 156, 162, 210, 261, 288; establishment ot, 247; first set up, 6s; number of, 250. Fulling party, 210 f. Furniture, 120, 141. Furs, 95, 155, 301. Fustian-maker, 64. Fustians, 63, 131, 203 f. Georgia, 18 f., sof-, 98 f-, 103, in note, 112, 134, 162, 183; ex- ports to, and imports from. Great Britain, 1773-76, 5S; Governor Wright's report on, 103; house- hold manufactures, 1790, 140 f.; household manufactures in 1810, 177 f.; imports from Great Brit- ain, 1767-69, 56; imports from Great Britain, 1776-83, 59; Mel- ish on condition in, 153 f.; slave population and household manu- factures, 1810, 185 f.; total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 331 fi.; value of' woolen goods exported from Eng- land, 1772-75. S7- Goodrich, S.G., an account of Ridge- field, Connecticut, 144 f. Gown, 126, 153, 204. Grater, 94, 190; how made, 219. Gratuities. See Premiums. Great Britain: imports from, 1776- 83, 59; value of exports to and imports from colonies, 1773-76, 58; value of imports from, 1767-69, S6. Greenville policy, resistance to, 53. GristmiUs, 156, 190, 221, 246, 257, 261, 288. Gulf States, agricultural system of, 296. Gunsmith, 145 note, 261 ff. Hair, cattle's, 194 f., 204. Handloom, 196, 206. Hand rakes, 236, 241. Handicraft system, 191; variations in, 245 i; =59 f-. 269. Handicraftsmen, early appearance of, 261. Handkerchiefs, 119, 204, 214. Handmills, 94, 190, 301; how made, 220; stone, 257. Hard times of 1787, 126. Harness, 69, 93, 99, 120, 156, 166, 198, 217; maker, 197; making, 245- Harrows, 49, 94, 236; A-shaped, 238. Hatchel, 81, 84, 137, 217. Hatcheling flax, process described, 208. Hatmaking, 66; regulation of, 26. Index 40s Hats, 66, 79, 95, 141, 144, 166; palm leaf, 291 note; premium for mak- ing, 40; straw, 301. Hatter, 144, 156, 263. Hemp, 29, 44, 47, 63, 69 f., 72 f., 80, 83 f., 95, 109, 127 f., 136 f., 141 note, 155, 158 note, 191 £E.; acts to encourage growth of, 30, 127 f.; bountieson, 34, 40, 41 note; field, 81; mill, 261; on stalk, 81. Hides, 93, 9S; buffalo, 196. Hoe handles, 237, 241. Homespun, 64, 88, 92, 118; cloth 67, 141 note, 143 note, 161 note, 163, 103, 137, 203; coats, 137; cotton, 121; Governor Livingston on, 128 f.; linen, 78, 100; traffic in, 88; woolens, 100. Hominy mills, 48; blocks, 48, 94, 219, 257, 217; how made, 219 f. Horse mill, 221; early existence of. Horses' traces, 69, 237. Hose, 98, 113 f., 116, 134, 153, 163; of cotton, 131; of wool, 131. House of Representatives, 161, 164. Household factory, 74, 120, 206; supplementary agencies to, 272 f. Household textile supplies, home manufacture of, 1809-20, 279 f. Huckster system, 265 f.; contribu- tion of, to the transfer to factory- made goods, 267. HuUs, black-walnut, 211; white- walnut, 211. Hunting-shirts, 119, 157 f., 196, 300. Illinois: household manufactures in 1810, 182; total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same ior every county, 34S £f. Implements, agricultural, 156. Imports: from Great Britain, 1767- 69, 56; into Louisiana, 1802, 161; official value of, from Great Brit- ain to colonies, 1773-76, 58; same for 1773-76, 58; restrictions on, 20. Independence: economic, 105, 122; importance of household manu- factures in securing, 5; industrial 123; political, 123. Indian broom, how made, 221 f.; price of, 222. Indiana, 143; early prices of furs in, 199 note; household manufac- tures in 1810, 182, 183; total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 344 ff. Indigo, 70, 95, 211 f. Industry, Boston Society for Pro- moting, 87. Inventories, 71, 73 f., 76, 84, 201; of Ulster County, New York, 136 f.; raw materials, implements, and finished products listed in, 81 ff. , Iowa: total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 365 f. Iron industry, law relating to, 26. Itinerant shoemaker, 85, 200, 248, 301; stage, 144; tailor, 248; weaver, loi, 248. Jeans, 131, 138, 141, 203 f. Kansas, total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308. Kentucky, 143, 162; household manufactures in, 1790, 141; in 1810, 178 f.; total and per capita value of household manufactures 4o6 Household Manufactures in the United States in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 337 ff. Kerseys, 77, 98. Lace, 133, 203 f., 214; and edging, manufacture of, 215. Lard, iss. 295. 3oi- Laws, English, relating to colonial manufactures, 25 f.; effects of, 27. Leaches, how made, 235. Leather, 68, 69 f., 72, 81, 84 f., 95, 119, 144, IS7, IS9, 197 ff., 300. Leggings, 120, 196, 200, 203 f. Light, materials used for, 232. Linen, 69 f., 77, 80, 95, 97 f., 100, 102, 106, no, 13s, 141, 162, 192, 194; chain, 119; cloth, law to encourage manufacture of, 29, 35 f.; goods, 66, 70, 147 note, 193, 285; operation connected with fabrication of, 206; premium on, 36 note, 39, 40, 42 note, 49 note, SO. S3. 55, 63, 69, 72 f., 81 ff., 86, 96, 102 f., 114 note, 133, 137 f., 140, 145, 162, 184; yards in New York in 1820-21, 288 f. Linen-wheels, 73, 81 ff. Linsey-woolsey, 54, 66, 68, 91, 100, 131, 203 f.; premium on, 40. Log boats, how made, 237. Loom, 39, 49, 6s ff., 73. 82 f., 85, 87, 93 f., 103, 124, 125 f., 144, 145 note, 151, 158, 162, 301; and tackling, 84. Lords of Trade: reasons given by for the prevalence of household manufactures in colonies, 47 f.; reports to, by colonial governors, 99 ff. Louisiana: about 1803, 160 f.; total and per capita values of house- hold manufactures in, and popula- tion of, in 1840, 1850, iS6o, 308; same for every county, 354 f. Lumber, 141, 155, 237. Lye, 198; how secured, 235. Madder, 157, 211. Maine: household manufactures, 1790, 13s; same in 1810, 159; re- port on conditions, 1705, 77; total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 312. Manufactures, restrictions on, 24. See also various states. Maple-beer, how made, 231. Maple sugar, 166, 228, 301; Benja- min Rush on the making of, 226 f.; pounds made, 1810, 227; season for making, 225 ff. Maple syrup, 217. Maple-wine, how made, 231. Maryland, 18; exemption of tools, etc., from assessment in, 151; exports to, and imports from, Great Britain, 1773-76, 58; Gov- ernor Sharp's report on, 102, 104, III ff.; household manufactures, 1790, 140; household manufac- tures in 1810, 173; imports from GreatBritain,i_767-69, 56; imports from Great Britain, 1776-83, 59; law relating to linen, 42 note; laws to encourage making of woolen cloth, 40 note; overpro- duction of tobacco, 1710, 49; seventeenth-century conditions in, 70 ff., 74 f., 80, 98 f., 102; total and per capita value of house- hold manufactures in, and popula- tion of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 321; value of woolen goods exported from England, 1772-7S, 57; ware- houses in, 19. Massachusetts: Governor Bernard's report on, 100; household manu- facture in 1810, 170; laws to en- Index 407 courage the manufacture of cloth and raising of hemp and flax, 29 fi.; manner of securing olcth- ing for army, 114 ff., 129, 133; Melish on conditions in, 146; non-importation agreements in, S3, 61, 6s, 77, 80; price of Indian brooms in, 220; sheep in, 192; shoemaking in, 200; total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 314; woolen goods made in Berkshire County, 1808, 146 note. Meal, 217; how made, 219 f. Mercantile system, 85; England's colonial, 13, 75 note. MethegUn, how made, 231. Michigan: household manufactures in 1810, 182; total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 3SI f. Middle colonies: seventeenth-cen- tury conditions in, 67 ff.; status of household manufactures in 1700-66, 89 fi., 200. Middle states: handicraft system in, 262; household manufactures, 1790, 13s f., 162; household manufactures, 1790-1809, 147 ff.; mill stage in, 27s, 293. Minnesota, total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308. Mississippi : household manufac- tures in 1810, 181, 183, 194; total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 355 ff. Missouri : total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 360 ff. Mittens, 196, 203 f. Mixed and unnamed goods, 166; yards and value of, 1810, 169 ff. Moccasins, 157 ff., 196 f., 200, 300. Mortar, 94, 190; and pestle, how made, 219. Nail-maker, 145 note, 262. Nails, 100, 134, 237; manufacture of, 239. Napkins, 82; napkin cloth, 83. Naval stores, bounties on, 23. Navigation acts of 1660, 1663, and 1672: effect on household manu- factures, 16; influence of, 16; substance of, 15. Nebraska, total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309. Nettle, lint of wild, 196. Nevada, total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309- New England: cider-drinking in, 229 f.; conditions in 1704, 76; decline in immigration in 1640 and its effects, 44 f., 50 note, 51 note; exports to, and imports from, Great Britain, 1773-76, 58; handicraft system in, 261; house- hold manufactures in 1 790-1809, 144 ff.; imports from Great Brit- ain, 1767-69, 56; imports from Great Britain, 1776-83, 59; mak- ing of palm-leaf hats m, 292 note, 293; Melish on conditions in, 146, 158, note; mill stage m, 275; miUs in, 255; nail-making in, 239 f.; number of cotton and woolen mills in, 274 note; popu- lation of, in 1640, 62; prosperity 4o8 Household Manufactures in the United States of, in 1640, 63 fE., 67, 7s; seven- teenth-century conditions in , 6 1 ff . ; shoemaking in, 200; shop stage in, 144; status of household manufactures in, 1790, 133 f.; tack-making in, 240; value of woolen goods exported from Eng- land, 1772-75, 57- New Hampshire: bounty on hemp, 37 note, 78, 80; Governor Went- worth's report on, 100; household manufactures, 1790, 13s; house- hold manufactures in 1810, 169, 19s; in shop stage in 1832, 245, 292; manner of securing clothing for army, 114; Melish on condi- tions in, 146, 162; total and per capita values of household manu- factures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 312 f. New Jersey: bounty on hemp and flax, 38 note, 69, 90, 92; Governor Franklin's report on, 102, 109, 128; household manufactures in 1790, 136; household manufac- tures in 1810, 171; list of home- spun articles, 202 f., 293; Melish on conditions in, 147, 165; total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308; same for every county, 319 f. New Mexico, total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, x86o, 309. New Netherlands: rule forbidding manufacturing in, 67 f ; sheep in, 192. New York, 50 note; appropriation for family manufactures, 306 note; exports to, and imports from, Great Britain, 1773-76, 58; Governor Moore's report on, loi, 112, 134; household manufac- tures, 1790, 136; household manu- factures in 1810, 170 f., 183, 19s; imports from Great Britain, 1767- 69, 56; imports from Great Brit- ain, 1776-83. S9, 69, 80, 88, loi; industrial revolution in, 307; laws to encourage home manufactur- ing, 148; non-importation agree- ments in, S3; number of manu- facturing establishments in, 307 note; output of household textile manufactures, 1820-21, 288 f.; population, 1820, 288 f., 293; population of in 1825, 1835, 1845, 1855, 304 f.; premiums awarded, 150 ff.; premiums awarded at a fair, 286 f.; total and per capita value of household manufac- tures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309; same for every county, 3156.; total and per capita yards of household tex- tiles in 182s, 183s, 184s, i8ss, 304 f.; value of woolen goods ex- ported from England, 1 7 72-75, 57 ; when counties were formed, 304 f . Noggins, 221; how made, 223. Non-consumption resolutions, 105. Non-importation agreements, 53, SS, 104; league, 120; policy, 143 note, 105. North Carolina, 18, 23; conditions in, 1763-83, 49 note, 51, 59, 96 f., 103; Governor Tryon's report on, 103, III note; household manu- factures, 1790, 140 f.; household manufactures in 1810, 175 f., 183; laws relating to woolen cloth, cot- ton cards, wool cards, 42 note; Melish on conditions in, 152 f., 162 f.; slave population and household manufactures, 1810, 185 f.; total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309; same for every county, 326 ff. Northwest Territory, handicraft sys- tem in, 263 f. Index 409 Ohio, 143; household manufactures in 1810, 172, 180 f.; total and per capita value of household manu- factures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309; same for every county, 341 ff. Ohio VaUey, mill stage in, 275. Oregon, total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309- Osnaburg, 82, 91. Ox-cart: axles of, 145 note; tongues of, 14s note; wheels of, 14s note. Ox-yoke, 69, 156, 237. Pantaloons, 153, 158; buckskin, 158 note, 196. Peeled-broom makers, 145 note. Pennsylvania, 50 note, 51 note; bounties on hemp, flax, linen, and woolen cloth, 37 note; conditions in 1763-83, 48; exports to, and imports from. Great Britain, 1773-76, 58; handicraftsmen in 1786, 262, 293; household manu- factures, 1790, 136; household manufactures in 1810, 172, 183; imports from Great Britain, 1767- 69. 56, 70, 7S, 80, 90, 93, 102, III note, 112 ff., 117; imports from Great Britain, 1776-83, 59; Mel- ish on conditions in, 148, 162, 165; non-importation agreements in, 53; total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309; same for every county, 317 £E.; value of woolen goods ex- ported from England, 1772-75, 57. Petticoat, calamanco, 126, 153, 196. PiUow cases, 82 note, 204. Pioneer, American: conditions, 195; dress of, 157 f.; necessities of, 157; woman's work, 157 f- Pitchforks, 236, 241. Plantation: factory, 184; manufac- tures, 122 f., 143; manufacturing, relation of slave population to, 184 f.; manufacturing, improfit- ableness of, 298; manufacturing, when included in discussion, 4, 72 f., 75, 100, no, 112, 121 note. Plows, 49, 94, 156, 236; "bar share," 238; "Carey," 238; "Daniel Webster," 238. Plymouth Colony, laws relating to sheep, hemp, and flax, 29 note. Population, states and counties, 1810, 169 ff.; states, 309; coun- ties, 315 flf. Potash, loi, 235. Pots and lamps, how made, 223. Power-loom, 247; introduction of, 27S- Premiums, i9fif.; awarded in New York, 150 ff.; awarded in Virginia, 74; bounties for raising hemp, 37 note; bounty on hemp, 41 note; effects of system of, 42; for best spinners, 88, 102; for spinning and weaving flax and wool, 38 f. ; on dressed flax, hemp, linen and woolen cloth, linsey-woolsey, hats, worsted hose, 40; on flax, 106, 116 note; on hemp and flax and linen cloth, 36 note, 37 note; on linen and woolen cloth, thread, cotton cords, wool cards, 42 note, S3i 63; on raising of hemp and flax, 34 ff.; on woolen cloth, 148, 149 note; paid on cloth, 30; paid on linen cloth, 35 note. Reels, 84, 137, 217. Regulations and restrictions, favor- ing English proprietors, 17; influ- ence of, 18. Restrictions: legislative, England's, 76; on agricultural products, 17; on enumerated articles, 18; on manufactures, 24 f. 4IO Household Manufactures in the United States Revolution, 112 f., 119, 137; effect on South, 137; industrial, 303. Revolutionary War, 58, 112, 283. Rewards. See Premiums. Rhode Island: an act for encoura- ging growth of hemp and flax, 127 f., 132, 165; household manu- factures in 1810, 170, 292; law to promote raising and manufactur- ing wool and flax, 37 note; man- ner of securing clothing for army, 114 £f., non-importation agree- ments in, S3, 5S> i°6; total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309; same for every county, 315. Ribbon, 127, 214. Ropemakers, 261 ff. "Run"' of yam, 118 note, 130 note. Runaway servants, clothing worn by, 91. Sawmills, 156, 190, 246, 257, 261, 288. "Sawpit," 190; how made, 238. Scythe snaths, 237, 241. Serges, 66, 70, 77 f., 131. Sheep: exempted from taxation, 128, 137, 141 note, 148 note, 149 note, 158 note; laws relating to, 29, 32, 38 note, 60, 63, 69, 73, 76; raising 76, 80, 90, 95, f., 103, 125, 184. Sheetings, 99, 131, 153. Sheets, 82 note, 126, 194, 204 f. Shirts, 113 £E., 158, 194, 204; blue linsey hunting-, 157. Shoemakers, 69 note, 72, 94, 119, 144, 156, 190, 197 f., 262 f.; itiner- ant, 8s, 200 f., 248, 301. Shoemaking, 66, 245; evolution of, 259 f. Shoepacks, 119, iS7> i97. 2oo- Shoes, 63, 69 f., 72 f., 93 ff., 99 f-> 113 ff., 116, 119, 137, 156 f., 166, 197 f., 200 f., 301. Shop- and factory-made goods, dis- tribution of, 264 ff. Shop stage. New England in, 144. Shuttles, 84, 137, 144, 217 f. Sieve-maker, 146 note. Silks, 90, 9S, 127, 134, 141; reelmg, spiiming, and weaving of, 214 f. Single- and double-trees, 237, 241. "Skein," 107, 118 note. Skins, 68; bear, beaver, cat, rac- coon, squirrel, wolf, woodchuck, 196; fox, 14s, 196; muskrat, 145; rabbit, 145, 196; sheep, 82. Slaves, 96, 98, 122, 13s, 141 note, 149, 160, 162; relation to planta- tion manufacturing, 184 f. Sleds, 49, 94, 120, 237, 241. Soap, 14s, 166, 217, 29s. Social life, influence of manufactures on, 6. Soft soap, how made, 236. South, 92, 99, III note, 112; condi- tions in 1810, IS4, 29s; effects of Revolution on, 137, 140, 149; household manufactures in 1790, 137; plantation manufacturing in 1830, 297 f. South Carolina, 18, 23; agricultural system of, 296; bounties on hemp, 41 note, 42 note, S7, 98, 109, in note; Drayton on conditions in, iSi f., 162; household manufacT tures, 1790, 140 f.; household manufactures in 1810, 177, 183; slave population and household manufactures in 1810, i8s f.; total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, i8so, 1860,309; same for every county,. 329 f. Index 411 Southern colonies, monopoly on English market given to, 18 f.; status of household manufactures in, 1700-66, 94 £E. Southern states, 140; household manufactures, 1790, 140 ff.; same for 1790-1809, 149 ff., 162. Spinner, premium for best, 88, 118 note. Spinning: and weaving, stages through which they went in pass- ing from home to factory, 272 ff.; law to foster knowledge of, 31; law to provide instruction in, 35 note; laws to stimulate, 39 ff., 54, 632., 77, 86 f., 96, 106, iiof., 121 f., 130, 14s note, 191 f., 196; process of, described, 209 note. "Spinning bee," 106; in Portland, Maine, 129 f., 130; results of, 108. "Spinning crazes," 85 ff., 88. Spinning-jenny, 247, 277, 297. Spinning machinery, 274. Spinning mills, 275. Spinning schools, 70 note; in Bos- ton, 86, 87 f. Spinning-wheel, 64, 66 f., 81 ff., 87, 103, 136, 151, 158 note, 182 note, 206, 301. Spinning-wheel makers, 263. Stage: family, 242; itinerant, 144; itinerant supplementary, 244; mill, large factory, 247 f.; mill, ?mall factory, 246 f.; shop, 201; variation in shop, 245. Stamp Act, 53 f., 88, 99, 104 f.; effects of opposition to, 109 f., 120. Steamboats, appearance on western waters, 270. Stockings, 53, 73, 98, 103, 115, 121, 133, 137, 139 f-, 166, 203 f.; weavers of, 262 f. Stools, 95 ; how made, 224. Straw, oat, 196 note; rye, 196 note. Sugar, 127, 141, 145, 152, 217. Sumach, 211; berries, 211. Sweep, how made, 219. Swingling-blocks, 217 f. Swingling-knife, 208, 217 f. System: American, 292; barter, 260 ff.; bounty, 22 f., 28; draw- back, 20 f.; factory, 27, 184, 268, 271, 274 ff.; huckster, 265 ff.; itinerant supplementary, 260; Mercantile, of England, 13, 75, 8s note; of premiums and effects of, 42. Table cloths, 82 note, 153, 204, 285. Tables, 156, 223; how made on frontier, 224. Tailors, 69 note, 94, 119, 144, 156; itinerant, 248, 262 f. Tallow, 84; candles, how made, 234, 301- Tanneries, 119, 197, 200, 261. Tanners, 69 note, 144, 149, 156, 262 f. Tennessee: changes in clothing worn in about 1800, 158; in 1802, 159; household manufactures, 1790, 141,143; household manufactures in 1810, 179 f.; mills in, 258; total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i86o, 309; same for every county, 334 ff. Texas, total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309; same for every county, 367 ff. Textile goods, total and per capita yards made in families in New York in 1825, 1835, 1845, 1855, 304 f- TextUe manufactures, total value of, in 1810, 167. 412 Household Manufactures in the United States Thread, 63, 94; woolen, 99, 119, 131, 134, IS9. 166, 198, 203 f., 253. Tools, shoemakers', 84, 137. Tow, 81 flf., 114 note. Towels, 66, 82 note, 131, 153, 194, 204 I. Transportation facilities, relation to household manufactures, 374 f. Treaty of Paris, 123 f. Trenchers, 221; how made, 222. United States: carding machines in i8ro, 252; fulling-mills in 1810, 250; industrial expansion of, 1830-60, 372 f.; list of goods manufactured in, 271 note; popu- lation of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 308 t. ; total and per capita values of household manufactures in 1810, 166; total and per capita values of household manufactures in 1840, 1850, i860, 308 f. Utah, total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309- Vermont: cotton and woolen goods made in 1809, 147 note; house- hold manufactures, 1790, 13s; household manufactures in 1810, 169, 183; maple-sugar making in, 226,292; Melish on conditions in, 147; total and per capita value o f household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309; same for every county, 313. Vest, 125, 157 f-, 200. Virginia: conditions in, 1763-83, 48 f.; cotton cloth, 143 note, 162, 165; exports to, and imports from, Great Britain, 1773-76, 58; house- hold manufactures, 179, 137 ff., 140; household manufactures in 1810, 173 ff., 183; imports from Great Britain, 1776-83, 59 f.; mills in, 256; overproduction of tobacco in 1710, 49 ff., 541 seven- teenth-century condition in, 70 ff., 71 f-, 74> 93> 95 ff-. Ill note, 112, 121 note; sheep in, 192; slave population and household manu- factures in 1810, 185 f.; total and per capita value of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309; same for every county, 322 ff.; value of woolen goods exported from England, 1772-75, 57; ware- bouses in, 19. Wagons, 120, 156, 236; wooden- wheel, 237. Waistcoat, 113 note, 196. War of 181 2, 123; diminution of manufacturing establishments after, 282; influx of foreign goods after, 280 f. Washington, total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309. Washington's plantation, spinning and weaving operations on, no f. Water-mills, early existence of, 256, 301. Weaver: each county in Virginia must provide, 39, 72, 87; itiner- ant, loi, 248; 119, 121 note, 141 note, 144, 149, 191; professional, prices charged by, 205 note. Weaving, law relative to, 31, 35 f., 39 ff., 63 ff.; shop for, 68, 87, 97, iiof., 121 f., 141 note, 14s note, 191 f., 196. West, condition in, 1820-30, 298 ff. West Indies, supply of cotton from, 193- Wheelwrights, 69 note, 145 note, 149, 262 f. Index 413 Whiskey, 141, 217, 295, 301. Wild nettle, lint of, 194. Windmill, 221; early existence of, Wisconsin, total and per capita values of household manufactures in, and population of, in 1840, 1850, i860, 309; same for every county, 353. Wolves, bounty for killing, 32. Wooden: bowls, how made, 223; bread trpughs, 221; hinges, 239; mills, 246; pestle, 257; shovels, 241; trays, 221. Wool: act of, 1699, 25; bounty for raising, 37 note; buffalo, 194 ff.; exportation forbidden, 32, 38, 47, 78, 8off., Sgf., 9s£E., 100, 103, 118, 126, 13s £f., 14s, 147, 149 note, 153 note, i6i note, 162 f., 191 £f.; laws in Virginia relating to, 38. Wool cards, 42 note; bounty on, 64, 73 ; number entering New England , 77. 82, 133, 137- Wool combs, number entering New England, 77, 137. Woolen bed covers, 152. Woolen cloth: law to encourage, manufacture of, 29; operations connected with fabrication of, 206; premium on, 148, 37, 39 ff., 40, 49 note, 69, 72 f., 92 ff., 90, 96, 102, 108, 114 note, 133, 137, 14s, 149 note, 152 note, 203 ff.; steps in process of making, 209 f. Woolen goods: value exported from England to colonies, 1772-75, 57, 99, 146 note, 147 note, 166; yards and value, 1810, 169 ff., 193. Woolen manufactures, forbidden in colonies, 25, loi. Woolens, 65, 97, 125, 132, 135, 152. Worsted: cloth, 83; combs, 84; hose, premium on, 40, 82, 84. Yarn, 63, 81 f., 84, 137 f., 153, 166, 19s; cotton, 65, 84, 107, 137, 203; linen, 53, 63, 65, 83, 103, 107, 119, 137, 203; tow, 81, 84, 119, 137; woolen, 82 ff., 103, 119, 137, 203, 20s, 253.