Voice of Industry

All of the writing was done by the "workingmen and women," who, Young wrote in his inaugural editorial, "can wield the pen with as much perfection as the instruments of their respective vocations," and to whom he extended "a hearty welcome ... whether they agree with us on all points or not.

They protested the new ways of organizing work, which, in the name of maximizing profit, was divided into confined, repetitive tasks that diminished their capacity for self-development.

They were dismayed by how economic power infected the political system, resulting in dubious and expensive wars, and making labor reform efforts difficult.

The overarching theme of worker protests during the 1840s was, as Norman Ware has observed, the loss of status and independence that took place as "sovereignty in economic affairs passed from the community as a whole into the keeping of a specialized class".

These women, the historian Thomas Dublin observes, felt "no deference toward their employers," expressing the conviction that they "were the social equals of their overseers, indeed of the millowners themselves.

"[5] This sense of dignity and social equality had played a significant role in the strikes of the previous decade, which were prompted by wage cuts by the mills.

In response to one of these cuts in 1834, a petition circulated "to obtain the names of all who imbibe the spirit of our Patriotic Ancestors who preferred privation to bondage,"[6] was signed by 800 women, and concluded with the following poem: Let oppression shrug her shoulders, And a haughty tyrant frown, And little upstart Ignorance, In mockery look down.

"Business men," wrote one operative, "in the general scramble for more, almost or entirely neglect all faculties of the mind but those directly called into action by their love of gain.

"[15] The divorce of religious principles from industrial relations was, in the words of another, "a fatal wrong", which allowed "professed christians to practice injustice in their business, social and political capacities.

Disturbed by the rapid spread of this selfish, individualistic ethic, workers looked to the various reform movements of the period, which organized production according to cooperative, rather than competitive, principles.

[17] Many workers were alarmed the disconnect between the enormous liberating potential of the new 'labor-saving' machinery, and the way this technology was instead developed and applied, in the name of maximizing profit, to increase output.

These workers were instead criticizing the definition of "efficiency" under the new economic system, in which "costs" were restricted to monetary expenses, and "benefits" were defined by physical output.

Many workers had come to Lowell for its vibrant, working class intellectual culture: they read voraciously in libraries and reading rooms, attended public lectures on topics ranging from astronomy to music, and even pursued literary composition (defying factory rules, some would even fasten verses to their spinning frames, "to train their memories," and pin up mathematical problems in the rooms where they worked).

"Who," asked an operative writing in the Voice, "after thirteen hours of steady application to monotonous work, can sit down and apply her mind to deep and long continued thought?

"[21] A former Lowell operative, looking back on her experience in the mills, expressed a similar view: "After one has worked from ten to fourteen hours at manual labor, it is impossible to study History, Philosophy, or Science," she wrote.

I am sure few possessed a more ardent desire for knowledge than I did, but such was the effect of the long hour system, that my chief delight was, after the evening meal, to place my aching feet in an easy position, and read a novel.

"[22] This sentiment—that repetitive and exhausting work was corrosive to "the expression and cultivation of the intellectual powers"—echoed concerns about the division of labor voiced by Adam Smith from almost a century earlier.

Smith argued that this epidemic of "gross ignorance and stupidity" wrought by the division of labor in civilized societies can be countered by extensive public education.

While textile corporations had cut wages twice in the previous decade, their power had been limited, as frustrated workers could leave the factories and return to their nearby rural homes.

By the early 1840s, however, many New England farms had been lost to a severe economic depression, leaving workers with no place to find respite from the harsh discipline of factory life.

While they often wrote about being treated by mill owners as "living machines," the reality was much worse—unlike their inanimate counterparts, workers were being compelled to produce more by applying discipline and control.

President James K. Polk, a Tennessee Democrat and expansionist, made the declaration after a military incident in which 16 American soldiers were killed by Mexicans.

The location of the incident was used as the justification for the war and was highly controversial—although Polk claimed that it took place on American soil, this was famously challenged by a newly elected representative from Illinois, Abraham Lincoln.

[31] Once in Lowell, the Voice continued to advocate for land and labor reform, and was particularly vocal in its support of the emerging movement for the Ten Hour Workday.

In a fiery public speech, a frustrated Bagley rebuked the Offering at a convention of the New England Workingmen Association in Worburn, Massachusetts on July 4, 1845, for its deference to the mill owners.

Indeed, writing in the pages of the Lowell Offering early in her tenure, Farley had been clear about her refusal to be drawn into any "controversies" over the conditions in the mills: "With wages and board," she wrote, "we have nothing to do.

It was recognized that in order to succeed, the Ten Hour Movement would require legislative action, which made government and the political process part of labor reform discussions for the first time.

The committee concluded by expressing confidence that any abuses in the mills would remedy themselves, through "the progressive improvement in art and science, in a higher appreciation of man's destiny.

"[33] The Voice reacted sharply to the report, charging that the political process had been hijacked by the corporations, and accused the committee of distorting the workers' testimony.

When Schouler sought re-election following the release of the report, the Female Labor Reform Association vigorously campaigned against him, possibly contributing to his defeat.