Tom wrote:

---

  If there wasn’t a need for more crops to be grown, the reaper wouldn’t had been need at this time period and the growth of agricultural machinery would have been a slower process.

---

 Tom, this is a very interesting statement.  Do you think that necessity is really the 'mother of invention'?  If that's true, why haven't cures for cancer or AIDS been developed yet?  What about genetic engineering?  Is cloning a necessity?  Just a thought... What do you think?

 

http://sc.essortment.com/cottongin_rciv.htm

http://www.wikipedia.org

http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/cotton-gin-patent/

 

 

The cotton gin, which was invented by Eli Whitney in 1793, had a huge impact upon American society because it increased the production of cotton in one day fiftyfold.  In 1793, one hundred and eighty thousand pounds of cotton was harvested in the US but in 1795 there was 6 million pounds.  By 1810, there was an astounding 93 million pounds harvested in the US.

 

Positive impacts of cotton gin:

·        Made cotton a crop that’s profit now rivaled with that of tobacco and indigo.

·        It revived a slacking economy of the Deep South

·        Cotton started to grow and prosper in places that normally didn’t have cotton like Texas, which increased our economy.

·        The old technique of crop rotation now went out of play and farmers started to use land that used to be idle.

 

Negative impacts of cotton gin:

·        Many food farmers were pushed out of their land to allow for bigger plantations that were used for cotton.

·        The amount of food lessened because of this.

·        Slavery grew because there was a greater demand of cotton.

·        Many areas in the south’s economy depended on the success or failure of cotton.

·        Large fields were harder to take care of so they needed more slaves to maintain the land.

·        At this point slavery was starting to die out but this invention is credited with bringing back slavery.

 

In conclusion, the cotton gin was an invention that had a huge impact on America.  It revived the slacking economy of the south but by doing that they had to expand slavery.  This invention was one that had negative and positive effects on America.

5. Discuss the roots of Irish immigration to America. Concider the changing historical “image” of Irish-Americans and their culture from the nineteenth century to the present, and the relationship between popular stereotypes (the Irish Police, St. Patrick’s Day) and the actual experience of Irish-Americans.

www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1990/5/90.05.07.x.html
Irish-American immigrants of the 19th century were seeking the land of opportunity and justice that many European immigrants believed America to be. In Ireland, farming was declining, and farmers and also many craftsmen and their families were living in severe poverty. Farmers had to rent their land from wealthy landowners who lived in England. In 1845, after a bad growing season, the potato, Ireland’s staple crop, was destroyed by a fungus that made the potatoes unfit for eating and stunted their growth. This lead to a huge famine that killed over 2 million people. Also, three more crop failures followed in the planting seasons in 1846, ’48, and 1851. Families were forced from their homes, and many starved to death during the famine. This was when a wave of over 1 million Irish immigrants made their way to America in hopes of a better life. Many of the immigrants did not survive the passage to America. Conditions on the ship were unbearable. Food was inadequate and often not cooked correctly, which made many passengers very ill, clean water was not in abundance either. The conditions in the hold were so cramped, with over 900 men, women and children in compartments about 5 feet high, with bunk beds stacked on top of each other.

When the Irish immigrants did arrive in America, they faced the obstacle of getting admittance into the country. They faced medical examinations, and if doctors found any signs of a disease or a possible handicap that could make the person a public concern, they were sent to another doctor for further examination, and faced the possibility of deportation if they did not pass the medical examination. They also had to prove their literacy through a series of questions, and were interrogated as to where they were going and who they were planning to live with once they were in the United States. Once the immigrants were in America, they were often met by a confusing array of people who cheated them out of money, set them up with dilapidated boarding houses for homes, and often sold them tickets to the wrong places. Many of the immigrants did not leave the port city that they landed in. This caused an overcrowding of people, because many Irish immigrants did not want to try and take up farming again, for fear that all the problems that had occurred in Ireland would repeat themselves in America. With so many people living in already crowded cities, living conditions quickly deteriorated. Sewer systems and indoor plumbing were not widespread, and many tenements that housed Irish immigrants had no plumbing system at all. Sewage collected in the outhouses, which invited rats and bred disease. Epidemics such as typhoid, tuberculosis and pneumonia broke out throughout the larger cities of the East Coast.
There was also a deep discrimination towards Irish immigrants during the 19th century. Only the lowest-paying unskilled jobs were available to them, and they were often physically demanding and dangerous. The Irish were blamed for America’s worsening economic problems and many American nativists believed that the growing number of immigrants would take job opportunities away from Americans.

Comparing these experiences to the popular Irish stereotypes, we find that many are very wrong in their assumption of the Irish people, but are still relevant to the Irish way of life. Due to the hardships and trials of everyday life lead most of the Irish population to find solace in bars. This has lead to the stereotype of the "Drunken Irishman". Evidence of the stereotype that St. Patrick's Day is a strictly Irish holiday stems from the fact that, in Ireland, St. Patrick's Day is a national holiday, and the day is devoted to parties and festivals in honor of St. Patrick.

The trials and tribulations of the Irish immigrants coming to America shaped the nation's perspective of them in the 19th century as well as in modern times.

Samantha Bailey

 

1.        Focus on the Irish and German immigrants and the nativist reaction to them. Show why nativists thought that immigrant poverty and Catholicism posed a threat to American democracy. Consider the important role that the Catholic Church played in the lives of Irish and German Catholic immigrants, despite the opposition of nativists.

 

 IRISH- the Irish immigrated to America due to living conditions and the ‘potato famine’. They faced crop failures and thus starvation. They also had very little rights and freedom in Ireland. There was religious freedom and other rights in America, as well as many jobs openings. Once in America, the irish faced a lot of hardship. Americans were predjudice against the irish. They treated them poorly and underpaid them. They felt the poverty they irish brought would effect them, such as raise crime rates and increase gangs and gang violence. They also felt threatened by the religion of most of the irish. The irish were catholic, and catholics obeyed the pope, which was viewed as a threat to the American government and democracy.

 

GERMANS- the failed german revolution forced many to leave for America in pursuit of democracy. Also came for ‘the American dream’ of a better life, as many other immigrants did. Many were protestant which nativist did not see as a treath as they did catholics. Most germans also did not come in a state of poverty, which also made them less ‘offensive’ than the irish.

 

Catholics, including german catholics, were feared because it was thought they would take the owrd of the pope of the word of the president. They also threatened the American job market by taking many of the available jobs. They also posed a threat merely by being poor, which in the eyes of those not in poverty makes you more likely to commit crimes.

 

http://www2.ops.org/NORTH/curriculum/socstudies/EthnicB2/past/Irish.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_American

6.        Discuss one or more of the early inventions and their relation to economic growth, e.g., the cotton gin, the sewing machine, the mechanical reaper, the telegraph. Consider how much technological progress depends on the proper social and economic conditions.

 

The sewing machine can be seen as one of the most helpful inventions of all time.  The first trace of the sewing machine can go back to the 1750s.  Not only did this machine help to make work easier, but it also was a start of mass production.   The textile industry boomed in America during the Industrial Revolution after being introduced to such a wonderful machine.  Because of the economic conditions, the sewing machine was pretty much always in use.  Women in sweat shops and factories were constantly using them for hours a day. As time went on, more people would buy clothes instead of making them.  We now have machines that don’t have to be worked manually and make our lives a lot easier.

 

Pros:

Larger amount of production in smaller amounts of time

Women could have jobs

 

Cons:

Low wages

Poor conditions

 

The sewing machine came with many benefits, yet if a man had operated them there would be fewer downfalls.  Women were allowed to be treated this way without much consideration.  

 

SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sewing_machine

 Discuss one or more of the early inventions and their relation to economic growth, e.g., the cotton gin, the sewing machine, the mechanical reaper, the telegraph. Consider how much technological progress depends on the proper social and economic conditions.

The cotton gin was invented in 1793 by a man named Eli Whitney. It was the first machine to clean short staple cotton. It had a cylinder with spikes, which rotated when you turned the crank. It would pull apart the cotton and separate the seeds from the fibers. Then there was a rotating brush that pulled the cleaned out fibers. This increased the production of cotton by fifty times. In return, it had increased the demand for cotton growth. By the mid-century America was growing three quarters of the world’s cotton supply and three fifths of its exports were cotton. As the demand for cotton increased, the demand for slaves increased. More and more slaves were being brought to the United States. From 1790 to 1860 more than 80,000 slaves were brought to America. By 1860, about one out of every three southerners was a slave. The cotton gin was a small beginning of the industrial revolution. It was invented around the time where machines were becoming a big part of the way Americans live their lives.

Hey, Milford and Curt?  If you had to choose between a more positive and a more negative impact on American society, economics, politics, etc. regarding the cotton gin, which would it be and why?

mr e

Question # 8: Focus on the lives of early factory workers, perhaps using the female textile workers of Lowell, Massachusetts, as a case study.  Compare female factory workers in early America with those working in sweatshops today.

 

          Although much has changed in our country, there are still some things that haven’t quite changed that many may be unaware of.  We’re going to see how two different jobs and different times don’t necessarily mean that it all has changed.

            Female textile workers of early America had to endure many hardships.  In order to get the attention of the girls for those jobs, the managers would promise high wages and good housing for all the girls.  That definitely caught the attention of many girls from all over America.  When the girls got there, they were able to find out that it wasn’t going to be completely peaches and cream like they officially had in their minds.  They were going to have to be housed with about 40-50 other girls, they would have to attend church when ever there was church, and they had to follow all rules made by the “mothers” of the boarding houses.  The “mothers” were the women in charge of the boarding house that had to make sure that the girls didn’t do anything wrong, and if they did do something wrong the “mother” had to make sure that the manager was aware of the girls wrongdoing.  Even though this didn’t seem to bad the condition of these places were nothing even close to sanitary enough for a bunch of young girls, starting from about age 10, to be living in.  The girls would start working in these mills at such a young age because that was about the time that the basic schooling was done for them.  They were expected to work 14 hours a day in very poor working conditions.  Many sicknesses and sudden deaths were constantly being documented and that’s when the girls knew that they definitely had to do something about that.  A bunch of the girls got together and formed many groups and associations to protest against the treatment the girls were receiving in those mills.  They wanted the people to know what they were really going through in their jobs.

            Sweatshops held basically the same treatment and poor working conditions.  Sweatshops, though, were open to anyone looking for a job; especially people who were in desperate need of work and immigrants finding a job.  This was the job one would take if there was no other chance of finding work anywhere else.  Their wages were extremely low ad they would work in very unsanitary conditions.  Today, these jobs in sweatshops haven’t completely disappeared.  People had and still have to endure tremendous hardships working in these sweatshops.  Many deaths and sudden sicknesses have recently been documented from people working in similar jobs meaning that they are still around. 

            We can easily see that even though we’ve greatly evolved as a country, there are still all around us suffering because of a lack of opportunities. Sweatshops are the modern form of the textile mills found in the mid 1800s.  It’s been something that has been very hard to escape; but just as the Lowell girls did something, we could all, as a country, work together against these unfair treatments.

How do you feel about the way Irish people are so often stereotyped?

 

6. Discuss one or more of the early inventions and their relation to economic growth, e.g., the cotton gin, the sewing machine, the mechanical reaper, the telegraph. Consider how much technological progress depends on the proper social and economic conditions.

 

The mechanical reaper was invented by Cyrus McCormick in 1831.  This machine was used to cut wheat and grain.  It combined all jobs that past harvesting machines did separately.  Farmers could get more work done and were able to work easier and faster with this new invention.  The economy made a good profit because the reaper was a good seller.  American society could function more effectively because there was more grain and people could get it faster.  This resulted in a shift of labor from farmlands to cities.  Farm machinery innovations were also effects of McCormick’s reaper.

At this time in history, the economy was suffering from low wages and poverty, so the invention of the reaper, along with other technological advances, greatly helped Americans in their time of need.

                                                        _Krystal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaper

 

http://www.invent.org/hall_of_fame/101.html

 

8.  Focus on the lives of early factory workers, perhaps using the female textile workers of Lowell, Massachusetts, as a case study.  Compare female factory workers in early America with those working in sweatshops around the world today.



The lives of the Lowell mill girls were very similar to those of sweat shop workers in not only third world countries, but America also. Many of these workers, both mill and factory workers today, work fourteen hour days for very little pay. Women in textile mills would earn about $2 per week, while workers now make sometimes as little as $0.28 a day. In both factories many children are exploited, most of them no older than ten years old. In sweat shops around the world there are over 250 million children between the ages of five and fourteen, half of them working full time. Both factories are extremely harmful to the health of their workers. Sweat shops today have chemicals which are very harmful to their workers, causing deadly diseases. 19th century mills were also dangerous to workers health due to poorly operated machines and poor ventilation in the factories, causing serious health issues for the women employed there. It is difficult for workers to make any reforms in their occupations because a majority of the factories, 75% of Nike’s shoe production, for example, are in countries where it is illegal to form independent trade unions, just as it was for mills in the 1800’s. It was very rare for workers to go on strike and when they would they were often ignored, which forced them to go back to work under their original conditions. In 1997, in the course of one week, over 11,000 workers at Nike factories in Indonesia and Vietnam went on strike in the same week for better conditions, although trade unions in both countries are banned. Forcing women and children to work under such conditions also forces them to give up any chance at a formal education. Mill women often had to use the wages they earned to pay for the education of their sons and brothers, some of the men who they paid for had not even met these women. Education in both cases would have been impossible, due to the extremely long hours and supervised time off, which left them with very little free time. Sweat shops are still widely accepted, through the indifference of consumers, throughout much of the United States, although it was reported that 75% of U.S. citizens would boycott stores which used sweat shops and 85% would be willing to pay 5% more for fair trade products, very little has been done to stop such exploitation of women and children throughout the world.


sources:
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/robinson-lowell.html

http://faculty.uml.edu/sgallagher/mill_girls.htm

http://www.halexandria.org/dward347.htm

http://www.sweatshopwatch.org/index.php?s=67

8. Focus on the lives of early factory workers, perhaps using the female textile workers of Lowell, Massachusetts, as a case study. Compare female factory workers in early America with those working in sweatshops around the world today.

 

Mill Girls: Early mill-girls were different age. Most between the ages of 16-25, some under 10 and in others were in middle life. The very young girls took off the full bobbins from the spinning frames and replaced them with empty ones. Usually they were paid about two dollars a week and If the overseer was good to them they could go out and play. Working hours were from 5 a.m. until 7 p.m. with one half-hour each for breakfast and dinner. The women often had to abide by strict rules and work in unbearable conditions.

http://womenshistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ/Ya&sdn=womenshistory&cdn=education&tm=9&gps=91_7_1020_563&f=00&tt=14&bt=1&bts=0&zu=http%3A//www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/robinson-lowell.html

Sweatshop Workers: Workers are paid as little as 15 cents per hour. Child workers as young as 15, work 13 hour days, seven days a week. Workers allege verbal, physical and sexual abuse by supervisors. Some sweatshops are surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards. People that live in the factories are crammed into dirty, small, cardboard cubicles. Essentially sweatshops are pure hell.

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/47/266.html

Early 19th century mills were very similar to sweatshops. In fact they appear to be almost identical. Many things that continue to go on in sweatshops around the world probably happened in the mills. Although they seem alike from reading numerous reports sweatshops seem to me significantly harsher than the old textile mills in towns such as Lowell. I have a great respect for people who endure that kind of brutality on a day to day basis just to stay alive. I’m sure if they had a change of environment and were brought away from their every day lives they would find a town and life like mine one of the most beautiful things.

 

-alexjardin a.k.a. mrj 

The Five Civilized Tribes are: Creek, Cherokee, Seminole, Chickasaw and Choctaw.

The Creek: http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/cultural/northamerica/creek_indians.html

The Creek’s original name is Muskogee.  When the British arrived in the Americas, they preferred not to pronounce their tribal name, which was particularly difficult to pronounce.   Thus, this group of Native Americans grew to adopt the name “Creek” which comes from their geographical location in Northern Georgia.  The Creek were a highly civilized tribe and had its own form of government that consisted of a Chief, Assistant Chief, and a Chief Speaker.  The Creek was actually more than one tribe.  The population was about 400 to 600 people, but often fluctuated due to the withdrawal or acceptance of other tribes into this ‘little nation’.  The Creek was the smallest of the Civilized Tribes.  It is believed that the reason for these tribal alliances was to protect against enemy tribes.  Unfortunately these partnerships were not strong enough to stand up against the Indian Removal Act.  The Creek fought many battles against the federal army.  The battle of Lumpkin was a harsh defeat for the Creek Indians.  The Federal Army was too strong for one group of people to fight.  The Creek, along with the other civilized tribes, were pushed west to Oklahoma nonetheless.  They faced harsh conditions and perished in great numbers along the way. 

 

The Seminole: http://www.keyshistory.org/seminolespage1.html

The Seminole tribe, like most American tribes, can be traced 12,000 years back.  They survived by hunting and fishing, but later quit hunting due to American tourists.  They eventually became part of American economy and worked as farmers.  The Seminole were one of the 5 civilized tribes and lived in Florida until 1821 when Florida was still controlled by Spain.  They were originally affiliated with the Creek Confederation, but later joined with another group of Native Americans and officially became the Seminole.  Florida consisted of rich and fertile lands and American settlers were moving their farms more closely to the Seminole civilizations.  The white settlers wished to remove the Indians in order to obtain more land.  Not to mention, many black slaves would escape from their plantations and seek shelter from the Seminole.  Angry slave owners and other Americans fought against the Seminoles, such as Andrew Jackson.  Their battles consisted of 3 Seminole Wars.  As a result of the wars, Spain handed over its Florida territory to the US.  Also, a majority of the tribes lost hope and no longer wished to fight.  As a result, they were immediately moved to Oklahoma along the Trail of Tears.  3000 Seminoles were forced westward to Oklahoma and Arkansas.

 

 Chickasaw: http://www.utm.edu/departments/acadpro/library/departments/special_col lections/wc_hist/chksaw.htm

 The Chickasaw were known as great warriors and lived near the Tombigbee River in Mississippi.  In 1600, they only had a population of about 5000, thus were considered a very small group compared to the Cherokee and Choctaw.  They claimed hunting land in Tennessee and Kentucky.  In peacetime, they did not live in towns but in scattered tribes.  When war was an issue, the Chickasaw would come together as one, large, civilized tribe.  They were in incredible shape, and when they fought in battle and were taken as captives, they worked on plantations with the slaves.  By the 1700s, they were living on confused territory between America and Spain.  Both countries wanted the territory.  When the Indian Removal act was issued, many fought back.  However, a great number of Chickasaw also signed treaties giving land to the Americans as well.  Many continued to live on American soil as mill workers or farmers.  Others were sent to Oklahoma where they later got land rights.

 

Choctaw: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choctaw

The Choctaw were scattered and very divided during the Revolutionary War, in which they sided with the British, Spanish, and the newly forming United States.  This division made the Choctaw alliance weaker than other tribes; however, they later came back together after the revolution and became allies to the United States. They refused to aid other countries other than the US.  They were great traders with Americans, therefore, affected the economy.  However, their supposed alliance with the US was not affective, when Andrew Jackson issued the Indian removal act.  Like the other civilized tribes, they attempted to fight back.  However, most of them signed treaties such as: Treaty of Hopewell, Treaty of Fort Adams, and the Treaty of Fort Confederation.  The most important treaty was Treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek, in which it signed away the rest of the Choctaw land.  Men, women and children were basically herded west.

 

The Cherokee: http://ngeorgia.com/history/nghisttt.html

The Cherokee are perhaps the most famous or well known group of the 5 Civilized Tribes.  They were located in and around North and South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky, and northern Alabama.  They were perhaps the largest tribe in the US at the time, however, before the United States was formed, the Europeans met with the Cherokee and unfortunately killed off 75% of their population with diseases.  Despite this decrease in population the Cherokee ranged in about 50,000 peoples.  They lived in about 200 villages, each consisting of 70 homes and a meeting house in the middle of the village.   They were primarily an agricultural group of people.  The Cherokee were essential traders with the British and other European countries before the US revolted from England. When the colonists won the revolutionary war, American settlers began moving west in great numbers.  The Cherokee was such a large population and lived off of much of the land wanted by white settlers.  When Andrew Jackson passed the Removal Acts, at first the government did not force the Cherokee to move because they were not a sovereign nation.  In the issue of Worcester vs. Georgia, the Chief Justice John Marshall ruled in favor of the Cherokee nation.  The Cherokee could only agree to the Removal Act with a signature.

However, when the Cherokee began to scatter and slowly divided. Major Ridge and John, and Elias Boudinot were all sons of Chief John Ross.  They advocated removal after signing the Treaty of New Echota.  After that, men, women, and children were taken from their land and forced to walk the long distance to the edge of the Mississippi, where they would cross the river by ship, and then march on into Oklahoma.  4000 Cherokee died along the way, one of the greatest losses on the Trail of Tears.  Death was primarily caused by disease, hunger, dehydration, and exhaustion.  It is a sad moment to look back at in history.

8.        Focus on the lives of early factory workers, perhaps using the female textile workers of Lowell, Massachusetts, as a case study.  Compare female factory workers in early America with those working in sweatshops around the world today.

 

Life in an early textile mill in Lowell, Massachusetts and the life of a sweatshop worker of the present time have more in common than most people think.

                Conditions in a Lowell factory in the 1800s were very harsh. Not only were the factory girls underpaid for the amount of labor they did, but much of their profits were given right back to their employer for things such as room and boarding and food. They worked long 10-12 hours days. Conditions inside the factory were hot, stuffy, and loud. Hundreds of machines spinning and working at the same time caused a loud ruckus.

                By definition, a sweatshop is a factory or place of harsh labor. Sweatshops are commonly found in underprivileged countries with developing economies. Sweatshop laborers are not protected by unions or any labor laws. These laborers are underpaid and are overworked in long, excruciating shifts.

                The uses of sweatshops today are very controversial. Our own country uses them, which is very ironic because we are the same country who fought so hard for labor laws and rights.

 

sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweatshop

mr. e study packet

mrj wrote:

---

Early 19th century mills were very similar to sweatshops. In fact they appear to be almost identical. Many things that continue to go on in sweatshops around the world probably happened in the mills. Although they seem alike from reading numerous reports sweatshops seem to me significantly harsher than the old textile mills in towns such as Lowell. I have a great respect for people who endure that kind of brutality on a day to day basis just to stay alive. I’m sure if they had a change of environment and were brought away from their every day lives they would find a town and life like mine one of the most beautiful things.

-alexjardin a.k.a. mrj 

---

 So MR. J.. are you trying to prove here that conditions in sweatshops are extremely worse than that of those in the lowell mills? Considering that most sweat shops exist in countries with less advanced societies, is it possible that the Lowell Mills weren't as bad because they existed in the United States? Does the ideals of civil liberties of a country impact how bad working conditions can be?

 

very good infornation in your post though.

Alex Z. wrote:

---

Chapter 14 Computer Lab Assignment

Question 6

Eli Whitney’s famous invention (infamous on these boards) - the cotton gin - had a major impact on America’s economic growth in the 1800s. Being approximately fifty times more efficient than picking cotton by hand created a cotton frenzy in the South that benefited the rest of the nation economically. As the cotton industry grew, the textile industry increased in the North to make use of all of the “home-grown” cotton. The economic increase in the North encouraged increased slavery and expansion of cotton in the South.

Now, suppose the cotton gin was invented in a different setting. First off, if there had been no industry within the country to make use of the cotton in large numbers, the South’s expansion would have most likely not occurred. If the South’s economy had not been so poor to begin with, would Eli Whitney have ever bothered inventing the cotton gin. Although that specific answer is impossible to determine, noticing what is needed is often the key to great inventions. Had the South’s economy been phenomenal and then the cotton gin was introduced, there is a fair chance that, despite it’s increased efficiency, it would have been ignored. This can be stated for two reasons: (a) the risk of a sharp rise in slavery might have created motion against the use of the cotton gin in an already wealthy South, and (b) a better “product” does not always beat out a more popular one. For these reasons technological progress depends heavily on specific social and economic conditions, and sometimes political ones, as well.

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotton_gin

---

Alex "Z" i think you touched on the importance of the cotton gin but im am very confused on ur statement on the reason the cotton gin wouldhave been successful. The South flourished because of the cotton gin and they put a massive increase of the cotton export out of the South. Even if the South was econmically strong they still would have used the cotton gin to increase the crop harvest and make more money.

6. Discuss one or more of the early inventions and their relation to economic growth, e.g., the cotton gin, the sewing machine, the mechanical reaper, the telegraph. Consider how much technological progress depends on the proper social and economic conditions.

 

People have been sewing for as long as 20,000 years ago, during the last Ice Age. Many archaeologists have discovered bone needles with eyes, used to sew together skins and furs, dating back to this time. Historians of the early days of the sewing machine can argue for hours over the simple matter of who invented what is, in many ways, one of the most important machines ever devised. French tailor Barthélemy Thimonnier invented the first functional sewing machine in 1830. Other tailors feared for their livelihood, and burnt his workshop down. Elias Howe however was an American inventor who patented an improved sewing machine in 1846. After being introduced to the sewing machine, the textile industry boomed in America, during the Industrial Revolution. It created mass production and it bettered the economy by creating more jobs in which factory workers and sweatshops slaved over for hours. Not only did it provide jobs, production also increased and smaller amounts of time. The argument of who invented the sewing machine can go on forever and it is unlikely that there will ever be agreement. What is clear, however, is that without the work of those pioneers, the dream of mechanized sewing would never have been realized and we would not have one of the great inventions we have today, the sewing machine.

• 
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sewing_machine
  
• 
  http://www.zoomschool.com/inventors/1800a.shtml

-melissa

Kirsten Pereira  :sunnysideup:

8.) Focus on the lives of early factory workers, perhaps using the female textile workers of Lowell, Massachusetts, as a case study. Compare female factory workers in early America with those working in sweatshops around the world today.

The Industrial Revolution was the beginning of widespread debate over fair wages, reasonable working conditions, and the responsibility of the society to meet these standards that they had set. Women began to seek out opportunities to work outside the home and provide for their family. Most women during this time worked in workshops, textile mills, and some even worked in coalmines. This fueled the Industrial Revolution and gave women what they believed to be at the time equal opportunity in the workplace. Unfortunately, these jobs payed very poorly and the women faced many hardships along the way.

Not only were women responsible for their children and taking care of their household but they were now responsible to complete their duties at work in unsanitary and sometimes even dangerous conditions as well. Not only were women exposed to this backbreaking labor but so were their children. What they thought to be an equal opportunity turned into somewhat of a nightmare, men were getting paid much higher wages, while women and children suffered through mistreatment and awful working conditions for a very sad amount of money. Fortunately, these women knew they deserved better, they understood what was going on and decided to take a stand. In December 1828 more than four hundred women began the first recorded strike of female textile operatives.

We have come along way since then, but even still we have not completely eliminated sweatshops that exist today. Harsh labor, long hours, and cruel and discriminating mistreatment are the realities of modern day sweatshops. Unbelievably, some of our largest and most popular retailers are guilty of using sweatshops as their main supply for sales products. Would you believe that Nike and even Wal-Mart are two of the largest sponsors for sweatshops? China and India being the center for which these sweatshops are run. Compare this to early factory workers during the Industrial Revolution and you will not only see that the same cruel and dangerous conditions and environments in which these people work in but you will also see one huge difference. Unlike most early factory workers such as the women of Lowell, MA, the men and women and young children that are working in sweatshops today do not have the tools and skills to fight back. Most children were born into this sort of life, laboring along side other children and adults. More than half of these sweatshops in foreign countries are run by companies in America, instructing these people who neither speak or understand the same language, or can even comprehend how awful their work environments really are. It’s ironic, with all these charities created by big companies to “save the children” and “stop poverty”, they still find the time and money to create more poverty and cruel mistreatment of children and adults through sweatshops. It’s a question of morals. Is the idea of wealth and money more important to some than the safety and well being of human beings? Obviously, we know the answer.

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweatshop
http://www.library.csi.cuny.edu/dept/history/lavender/lowstr.html

"Zarecki"- I like how you looked at things from a different perspective.  Like what things would be like if Eli Whitney hadn't invented the cotton gin.  Good info buddy

mrj wrote:

---

 

Mill Girls: Early mill-girls were different age. Most between the ages of 16-25, some under 10 and in others were in middle life. The very young girls took off the full bobbins from the spinning frames and replaced them with empty ones. Usually they were paid about two dollars a week and If the overseer was good to them they could go out and play. Working hours were from 5 a.m. until 7 p.m. with one half-hour each for breakfast and dinner. The women often had to abide by strict rules and work in unbearable conditions.

http://womenshistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ/Ya&sdn=womenshistory&cdn=education&tm=9&gps=91_7_1020_563&f=00&tt=14&bt=1&bts=0&zu=http%3A//www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/robinson-lowell.html

Sweatshop Workers: Workers are paid as little as 15 cents per hour. Child workers as young as 15, work 13 hour days, seven days a week. Workers allege verbal, physical and sexual abuse by supervisors. Some sweatshops are surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards. People that live in the factories are crammed into dirty, small, cardboard cubicles. Essentially sweatshops are pure hell.

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/47/266.html

Early 19th century mills were very similar to sweatshops. In fact they appear to be almost identical. Many things that continue to go on in sweatshops around the world probably happened in the mills. Although they seem alike from reading numerous reports sweatshops seem to me significantly harsher than the old textile mills in towns such as Lowell. I have a great respect for people who endure that kind of brutality on a day to day basis just to stay alive. I’m sure if they had a change of environment and were brought away from their every day lives they would find a town and life like mine one of the most beautiful things.

 

-alexjardin a.k.a. mrj 

---

 

does it make a difference in your opinion that the mill workers were often provided with food and housing while working in the mills?

 

To me that seems to make the mills a much more bearable place than a sweatshop. I also dont think that the levels of abuse were that high in a mill, otherwise history books wouldnt delve so deep into the mill process.

Look at their coverage of the Native Americans if you'd like an explaination of that statement.

 

Sarah

End of Wednesday's class.

8. Focus on the lives of early factory workers, perhaps using the female textile workers of Lowell, Massachusetts, as a case study. Compare female factory workers in early America with those working in sweatshops around the world today.

The first mills opened in 1823, and by 1848, the mills of Lowell produced 50,000 miles of cotton cloth each year. The conditions under which the mill girls worked were not favorable. Most of the Lowell mill girls were between the ages of 16 and 25. Some, however, were no older than 10. The hours of labor went from 5 a.m. to 7 p.m. and the girls had only half an hour to eat breakfast and the same amount of time for lunch. This half hour included the time needed to get to where the girls were eating, and then back to the factory. The younger girls had the job of replacing full bobbins with empty ones. These girls worked only about 15 minutes an hour, but were still required to stay the 14 hours. “Doffers,” as these young girls were called, were paid two dollars a week. In Lowell, in 1836, one of the first strikes took place when mill girls found out that their wages were going to be cut. Their strike didn’t do any good. After getting tired of being on strike, the returned to their jobs, which now had the reduced wages.

The rooms in which the girls worked were filled with cotton filaments and dust, which made it harder than it would be to breathe. Windows were also kept shut, even in warmer weather, because wind disrupted the work from being done to it’s best ability. The mill girls slept six to a room, with three beds to each room. Privacy was not given very often in their boarding-houses.

A sweatshop is a workplace where employees are forced to work strenuously for low wages. Sweatshop workers have to endure long hours of labor, extremely low wages, very unsafe and unsanitary working conditions, and sexual harassment. Some women wrote a letter to the Nike company, which supports sweatshops, that the women working in Nike’s shops, “suffer from inadequate wages, corporal punishment, forced overtime and/or sexual harassment.” USA Today reported that, “Bangladesh workers earn as little as nine cents an hour making shirts for Wal-Mart.” The National Labor Committee reported that in China factories of Wal-Mart, the clothing is usually sewn by women, ages 17-25, who work seven days a week, earning between 12-28 cents an hour. They also have no benefits. The women working in these factories sleep in the dormitories, 15 to a room that is dirty and crowded. If any of the workers are discovered speaking about the conditions of the factory, they will be fired. Pregnant women are pressured to quit and companies that allow them to leave will only take them back as new workers. In Honduras, the factories have 24-hour shifts, and if a worker refuses to stay, they will be fired. These workers get paid 43 cents an hour. Workers at the Gladpeer Garment Factory in Dongguan, China, most of whom are women, are paid $55 a month, which is only $1.81 a day. These workers have to live eight to a room.

These conditions are wrong for any person to have to endure. Why anyone would want to force another person to go through so much unnecessary horrible conditions is beyond me. Therefore, the only reason for sticking with sweatshops as a means of manufacturing products is greed, at least that’s the only reason I can personally think of. People want to purchase things as cheap as they can, and most of them don’t care how they get it as long as it’s low in price. That’s where the sweatshop comes in. People are able to obtain the products they want at a low price because the ones making it are underpaid and have to go through unfair treatment. However, it gets the products to the stores which are then bought, and saves the employers money since they pay their workers very low wages.

Both the mill girls of the 1800s and the women employed at sweatshops today were/are treated very poorly. The conditions were/are harsh to the employees. The treatment of the factory girls and sweatshop workers are similar, like the dormitories they lived in and the low pay they receive from their employers. Nevertheless, this unfair treatment of workers needs to be put to an end.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/robinson-lowell.html

http://www.kentlaw.edu/ilhs/lowell.html

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/26/076.html

http://www.workertimes.com/ltribune/walmart10.html

Wow Tanya, You used a lot of information.  I really liked the way you explained everything with such organization and how you included so many facts.  I had no idea they were paid only 55 dollars a month,for such long hours too.  If anything, the formation of sweatshops actually began with the mill girls.  The only difference is the time period and the huge discrimination towards women.  Actually, that hasnt changed either!  Women still lack their individual rights all over the world, especially in other countries where sweatshops are unfortunately legal. i mean, if sweatshops are legal, then women's rights is not exactly an obligation, is it?  This topic makes me sad.  Its really pathetic when people are suffering in terrible working conditions for such little pay, and its been happening since the early 19th century in America.

Kelsey Smith wrote:

---

The true question to ask is whether or not as America has progressed in technology do we still have work conditions as we did when we first started off, and the answer is yes.

          

---

 

Kelsey, awesome job! You made good points on how cruel the work conditions can be and how early factory workers and woman can be compared to workers in sweatshops today. The quote above really caught my attetion, first off because i was mostly focused on how morally wrong sweatshops and even the idea of them are when i wrote my essay and did not even touch on the idea of technology putting a stop to it. Your right, if we have so much "wonderful" technology that can "change the world" and blah, blah, blah, then why didnt all of this nonsense stop during the Industrial Revolution when technological machines first came about. I dont really have any questions i just wanted to express my appreciation for pointing this out to me.