Armies of Labor A chronicle of the organized wage-earners

Peter Orth Samuel

Description

pubOne.info present you this new edition. Three momentous things symbolize the era that begins its cycle with the memorable year of 1776: the Declaration of Independence, the steam engine, and Adam Smith's book, "The Wealth of Nations. " The Declaration gave birth to a new nation, whose millions of acres of free land were to shift the economic equilibrium of the world; the engine multiplied man's productivity a thousandfold and uprooted in a generation the customs of centuries; the book gave to statesmen a new view of economic affairs and profoundly influenced the course of international trade relations.

Informations

• Publié par: Pub One Info
• Date de parution: 06 novembre 2010
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9782819945192
• Langue: English

Extrait

THE ARMIES OF LABOR,
A CHRONICLE OF THE ORGANIZED WAGE-EARNERS
By Samuel P. Orth
VOLUME 40 IN THE CHRONICLES OF AMERICASERIES
THE ARMIES OF LABOR
CHAPTER I. THE BACKGROUND
Three momentous things symbolize the era that beginsits cycle with the memorable year of 1776: the Declaration ofIndependence, the steam engine, and Adam Smith's book, “The Wealthof Nations. ” The Declaration gave birth to a new nation, whosemillions of acres of free land were to shift the economicequilibrium of the world; the engine multiplied man's productivitya thousandfold and uprooted in a generation the customs ofcenturies; the book gave to statesmen a new view of economicaffairs and profoundly influenced the course of international traderelations.
The American people, as they faced the approachingage with the experiences of the race behind them, fashioned many oftheir institutions and laws on British models. This is true to suchan extent that the subject of this book, the rise of labor inAmerica, cannot be understood without a preliminary survey of theBritish industrial system nor even without some reference to thefeudal system, of which English society for many centuries bore themarks and to which many relics of tenure and of class andgovernmental responsibility may be traced. Feudalism was a societyin which the status of an individual was fixed: he was underman oroverman in a rigid social scale according as he considered hisrelation to his superiors or to his inferiors. Whatever movementthere was took place horizontally, in the same class or on the samesocial level. The movement was not vertical, as it so frequently istoday, and men did not ordinarily rise above the social level oftheir birth, never by design, and only perhaps by rare accident orgenius. It was a little world of lords and serfs; of knights whograced court and castle, jousted at tournaments, or fought upon thefield of battle; and of serfs who toiled in the fields, served inthe castle, or, as the retainers of the knight, formed the crudesoldiery of medieval days. For their labor and allegiance they wereclothed and housed and fed. Yet though there were feast days gaywith the color of pageantry and procession, the worker was alwaysin a servile state, an underman dependent upon his master, andsometimes looking upon his condition as little better thanslavery.
With the break-up of this rigid system came inEngland the emancipation of the serf, the rise of the artisanclass, and the beginnings of peasant agriculture. That personalgravitation which always draws together men of similar ambitionsand tasks now began to work significant changes in the economicorder. The peasantry, more or less scattered in the country, foundit difficult to unite their powers for redressing their grievances,although there were some peasant revolts of no mean proportions.But the artisans of the towns were soon grouped into powerfulorganizations, called guilds, so carefully managed and so welldisciplined that they dominated every craft and controlled everydetail in every trade. The relation of master to journeyman andapprentice, the wages, hours, quantity, and quality of the output,were all minutely regulated. Merchant guilds, similarlyconstituted, also prospered. The magnificent guild halls thatremain in our day are monuments of the power and splendor of theseorganizations that made the towns of the later Middle Agesflourishing centers of trade, of handicrafts, and of art. As townsdeveloped, they dealt the final blow to an agricultural systembased on feudalism; they became cities of refuge for the runawayserfs, and their charters, insuring political and economic freedom,gave them superior advantages for trading.
The guild system of manufacture was graduallyreplaced by the domestic system. The workman's cottage, standing inits garden, housed the loom and the spinning wheel, and the entirefamily was engaged in labor at home. But the workman, thusapparently independent, was not the owner of either the rawmaterial or the finished product. A middleman or agent brought himthe wool, carried away the cloth, and paid him his hire. DanielDefoe, who made a tour of Britain in 1794-6, left a picture ofrural England in this period, often called the golden age of labor.The land, he says, “was divided into small inclosures from twoacres to six or seven each, seldom more; every three or four piecesof land had an house belonging to them, . . . hardly an housestanding out of a speaking distance from another. . . . We couldsee at every house a tenter, and on almost every tenter a piece ofcloth or kersie or shalloon. . . . At every considerable house wasa manufactory. . . . Every clothier keeps one horse, at least, tocarry his manufactures to the market and every one generally keepsa cow or two or more for his family. By this means the small piecesof inclosed land about each house are occupied, for they scarce sowcorn enough to feed their poultry . . . . The houses are full oflusty fellows, some at the dye vat, some at the looms, othersdressing the clothes; the women or children carding or spinning,being all employed, from the youngest to the oldest. ”
But more significant than these changes was the riseof the so-called mercantile system, in which the state took underits care industrial details that were formerly regulated by thetown or guild. This system, beginning in the sixteenth century andlasting through the eighteenth, had for its prime object theupbuilding of national trade. The state, in order to insure thehomogeneous development of trade and industry, dictated the pricesof commodities. It prescribed the laws of apprenticeship and therules of master and servant. It provided inspectors for passing onthe quality of goods offered for sale. It weighed the loaves,measured the cloth, and tested the silverware. It prescribed wages,rural and urban, and bade the local justice act as a sort ofguardian over the laborers in his district. To relieve poverty poorlaws were passed; to prevent the decline of productivity corn lawswere passed fixing arbitrary prices for grain. For a timemonopolies creating artificial prosperity were granted toindividuals and to corporations for the manufacture, sale, orexploitation of certain articles, such as matches, gunpowder, andplaying-cards.
This highly artificial and paternalistic state wasnot content with regulating all these internal matters but spreadits protection over foreign commerce. Navigation acts attempted tomonopolize the trade of the colonies and especially the trade inthe products needed by the mother country. England encouragedshipping and during this period achieved that dominance of the seawhich has been the mainstay of her vast empire. She fosteredplantations and colonies not for their own sake but that they mightbe tributaries to the wealth of the nation. An absurd importancewas attached to the possession of gold and silver, and theingenuity of statesmen was exhausted in designing lures to enticethese metals to London. Banking and insurance began to assume primeimportance. By 1750 England had sent ships into every sea and hadplanted colonies around the globe.
But while the mechanism of trade and of governmentmade surprising progress during the mercantile period, themechanism of production remained in the slow handicraft stage. Thiswas now to change. In 1738 Kay invented the flying shuttle,multiplying the capacity of the loom. In 1767 Hargreaves completedthe spinning-jenny, and in 1771 Arkwright perfected his rollerspinning machine. A few years later Crompton combined the rollerand the jenny, and after the application of steam to spinning in1785 the power loom replaced the hand loom. The manufacture ofwoolen cloth being the principal industry of England, it wasnatural that machinery should first be invented for the spinningand weaving of wool. New processes in the manufacture of iron andsteel and the development of steam transportation soonfollowed.
Within the course of a few decades the wholeeconomic order was changed. Whereas many centuries had beenrequired for the slow development of the medieval system offeudalism, the guild system, and the handicrafts, now, like aseries of earthquake shocks, came changes so sudden and profoundthat even today society has not yet learned to adjust itself to themyriads of needs and possibilities which the union of man's mindwith nature's forces has produced. The industrial revolution tookthe workman from the land and crowded him into the towns. It tookthe loom from his cottage and placed it in the factory. It took thetool from his hand and harnessed it to a shaft. It robbed him ofhis personal skill and joined his arm of flesh to an arm of iron.It reduced him from a craftsman to a specialist, from a maker ofshoes to a mere stitcher of soles. It took from him, at a singleblow, his interest in the workmanship of his task, his ownership ofthe tools, his garden, his wholesome environment, and even hisfamily. All were swallowed by the black maw of the ugly new milltown. The hardships of the old days were soon forgotten in thehorrors of the new. For the transition was rapid enough to make thecontrast striking. Indeed it was so rapid that the new class ofemployers, the capitalists, found little time to think of anythingbut increasing their profits, and the new class of employees, nowmerely wage-earners, found that their long hours of monotonous toilgave them little leisure and no interest.
The transition from the age of handicrafts to theera of machines presents a picture of greed that tempts one tobitter invective. Its details are dispassionately catalogued by theRoyal Commissions that finally towards the middle of the nineteenthcentury inquired into industrial conditions. From these reportsKarl Marx drew inspiration for his social philosophy, and in themhis friend Engles found the facts that he retold so vividly, forthe purpose of arousing his fellow workmen. And Carlyle and Ruskin,reading this official record of selfishn