Loom and spindle

by Harriet Jane Hanson Robinson

The cotton-factories themselves are not so agreeable nor so healthful to work in as they used to be. Once they were light, well ventilated, and moderately heated; each factory-building stood detached, with pleasant sunlit windows, cheerful views, and fresh air from all points of the compass. But these buildings are now usually made into a solid mass by connecting “annexes,” and often form a hollow square, so that at least one-half of the operatives can have no outlook except upon brick walls, and no fresh air but that which circulates within this confined space.

A year or two ago I revisited the dressing-room where I used to work, and found the heat so intense that I could hardly breathe; and the men who were working there (there were no women in the room) wore the scantiest of clothing, and were covered with perspiration.

The drying of the beams is done by hot air, though sometimes fans are added; the windows and doors are kept shut, except in very fine weather; and this makes an atmosphere unfit to breathe. My old overseer, who had had charge of one room for over forty years, told me that some time ago he had been obliged to change his occupation in the mill on account of the intense heat consequent on the introduction of this new method of drying the beams.

Nor are the houses kept clean and in repair as they used to be. In Lowell, when I last walked among the “blocks” where I lived as a child, I found them in a most dilapidated condition,—houses going to decay, broken sidewalks, and filthy streets; and contrasting their appearance with that of the “corporation” as I remember it, I felt as if I were revisiting the ruins of an industry once clean and prosperous. Would that I could say one word that would lead stockholders to see that it is not from out of such surroundings that the best dividends can be secured!

To one who has watched with sad interest the gradual decline of the cotton-factory industry in New England, and has marked the deterioration of its operatives, it has often seemed as if something might be done to restore this great factor in our national prosperity to its early influence and importance. Many schemes have been advanced by political economists, but, thus far, they have borne no fruit, and at this present writing, the Massachusetts Legislature itself has placed the whole subject in the hands of the Committee on Labor, who are to report on the several items submitted to its decision. While I would not venture here to discuss the various points on which this committee is to report, I cannot forbear calling attention to the first section, which relates to the “Dingley Tariff.”

This section enquires, substantially, whether the Dingley tariff has had any influence in producing the present stagnation of the New England cotton industry. As a help to the solution of this question, or a suggestion at least, I will venture to quote from an article in the report of the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor, on “The Age of Factory Establishments,” where it is stated that “Quite one-half of the whole product of the State is made by manufactories which were in existence before 1860, and most of these establishments were founded in the industrial period following the beginning of the reduction of the tariff of 1828; and it can be said, with truth, that the great manufacturing industry of Massachusetts was planted in low-tariff times.”

If this statement is correct, of which there can be no doubt, it has a significance worthy of attention, when we see the downward movement of the cotton industry under the present high-tariff. It was these “low-tariff times” that enabled working-people to buy goods that would last, which they cannot do in these days of “home production” shoddy, protected, as it is, by the Dingley tariff. And, without entering into the discussion, it would seem that a low tariff is certainly desirable for working-people, at least, since it enables them to get the best there is for their money, whether it be of foreign or domestic manufacture. An able writer has said: “The great trouble with the New England mills now is, that the people want a better class of goods which can compete with other textile products.” This is certainly true, as applied to the buyer. A person of limited means can better afford to buy goods of foreign manufacture, no matter how high the tariff is. For woollens we look to England; for silks, to Lyons or Zurich; and lighter material must be of French manufacture. And the dealer says to you, as the best recommendation for the goods you wish to purchase, “It is English, or it is French goods, that I am showing you.”

As for cheap American prints, who prefers to buy them nowadays? Certainly no woman who remembers with affection the good, pretty, durable, and washable old Merrimack print,—the old-time calico, that, when partly worn out, would still do for gowns and “tiers” for the children, or for comforters for the family beds. Gentlemen! mill-owners and managers! give us as good material as that we can buy of English and French manufacture, and we will wear no more dress-goods that are not of “home production,” and will cheerfully pay you whatever price you may ask for them. This can certainly be done, with all your inventive genius, and you need no longer fear either foreign or Southern competition.

One more suggestion. It has often seemed that one great cause of the decline of the cotton industry is to be found in the change in the character of the operatives themselves. But could not some inducement be offered to call to this industry a better class of operatives, or to elevate a part of them towards the status of the old-time mill-girls? The factory-operatives of to-day are more like those of England, whom I have described, when the cotton manufacture first began in America. Then, mill-owners and stockholders knew that the daughters of New England would not become mill-girls under existing conditions, and unless they were sure of good wages and of being treated like human beings. This assurance was given; and the consequence was that they flocked from their homes, and so helped to build up an industry that was to give the first great impetus to the coming prosperity of the whole country. Could not this experiment be tried anew? There must be—there are—thousands of young women, all over New England, working for almost a pittance in stores and workshops, some of them twelve hours a day, subject to temptations that would never reach them in the cotton-factory,—women and girls who have no homes, who would gladly go to the factories, if a comfortable home, short hours, sure work, and steady wages were assured to them. Let the best of them work by the job or piece, as far as possible; for this shows, more than any other “reform in labor,” where the best class of operatives can be found, and the best result of their work can be secured. Why not try these or some better experiments, and so uplift gradually the status of the modern factory-operative?

These suggestions regarding a better class of goods and a better class of operatives, if carried out, will involve sacrifice for a time on the part of the mill-owners and stockholders. But it is certainly better to sacrifice even a great deal than it is to lose all; and there seems to be danger of this if something radical and far-reaching cannot soon be done to improve the present condition of our New England cotton-factories and their operatives.