@prefix vivo: . @prefix edm: . @prefix ns0: . @prefix dcterms: . @prefix skos: . vivo:departmentOrSchool "Arts, Faculty of"@en, "History, Department of"@en ; edm:dataProvider "DSpace"@en ; ns0:degreeCampus "UBCV"@en ; dcterms:creator "Nellis, Eric Guest"@en ; dcterms:issued "2010-03-15T18:33:08Z"@en, "1979"@en ; vivo:relatedDegree "Doctor of Philosophy - PhD"@en ; ns0:degreeGrantor "University of British Columbia"@en ; dcterms:description """The particular forms of work in provincial Massachusetts influenced and were reflected in the structure of that society to an extent previously ignored by social historians. While this study presents a description of individual practices and collective patterns of work, it addresses itself to the broader framework of provincial society. As the analysis proceeds, it tests the conclusions of a large number of recent historians who have found significant change in the social structure of Massachusetts in the decades prior to 1765. There were two distinct settings for work in the province: the rural network of self-contained towns where subsistence farming and an informal system of labor and commodity exchange formed a socio-economic base for the great majority of the population; and the commercial economy of coastal Massachusetts, as exemplified by Boston, where contracted specialized crafts work and individual control of production were the most common features of labor. This analysis of work and workers reveals a marked difference in the respective forms of work in each of the settings, but it confirms a similar degree of communal influence upon the nature and objectives of work. Conversely, the chief features and arrangements of work helped to sustain the established forms of family, domicile and local society."""@en ; edm:aggregatedCHO "https://circle.library.ubc.ca/rest/handle/2429/21913?expand=metadata"@en ; skos:note "COMMUNITIES OF WORKERS: FREE LABOR IN PROVINCIAL MASSACHUSETTS, 1690-1765 by ERIC GUEST NELLIS B.A. , U n i v e r s i t y of Calgary, 1974 M.A., U n i v e r s i t y of Western Ontario, 1975 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES i n the Department of HISTORY We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l 1979 (c ) E r i c Guest N e l l i s , 1979 In present ing t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Co lumbia, I agree tha t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r re fe rence and s tudy. I f u r t h e r agree tha t permiss ion f o r ex tens ive copying of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h i s r e p r e s en t a t i v e s . I t i s understood tha t copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l ga in s h a l l not be a l lowed wi thout my w r i t t e n pe rm iss i on . Department nf H . & W y The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook P lace Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date K a V [°> l S > 7 S > i i ABSTRACT The p a r t i c u l a r forms of work i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts influenced and were r e f l e c t e d i n the s t r u c t u r e of that s o c i e t y to an extent p r e v i o u s l y ignored by s o c i a l h i s t o r i a n s . While t h i s study presents a d e s c r i p t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l p r a c t i c e s and c o l l e c t i v e patterns of work, i t addresses i t s e l f to the broader framework of p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y . As the a n a l y s i s proceeds, i t t e s t s the conclusions of a large number of recent h i s t o r i a n s who have found s i g n i f i c a n t change i n the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e of Massachusetts i n the decades p r i o r to 1765. There were two d i s t i n c t s e t t i n g s f o r work i n the province: the r u r a l network of s e l f - c o n t a i n e d towns where subsistence farming and an informal system of labor and commodity exchange formed a socio-economic base f o r the great m a j o r i t y of the population; and the commercial economy of c o a s t a l Massachusetts, as exemplified by Boston, where contracted s p e c i a l i z e d c r a f t s work and i n d i v i d u a l con-t r o l of production were the most common features of labor. This a n a l y s i s of work and workers reveals a marked d i f f e r e n c e i n the respec-t i v e forms of work i n each of the s e t t i n g s , but i t confirms a s i m i l a r degree of communal i n f l u e n c e upon the nature and o b j e c t i v e s of work. Conversely, the c h i e f features and arrangements of work helped to s u s t a i n the es t a b l i s h e d forms of f a m i l y , d o m i c i l e and l o c a l s o c i e t y . i i i These conditions were upheld i n a balance of i n d i v i d u a l i s m and communalism. In r u r a l s o c i e t y the worker was s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t only to the extent that h i s small farm would permit; beyond that he was dependent on the community f o r the means to apply h i s e x t r a labor and as a source of the goods and s e r v i c e s h i s farm could not provide. In Boston the a r t i s a n exercised independent c o n t r o l of h i s l a b o r but could not c o n t r o l a s i g n i f i c a n t share of the l o c a l market. He was mutually dependent on the i n d i v i d u a l services of other s p e c i a l i z e d a r t i s a n s . In both cases, the worker's s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y was tempered by l o c a l s o c i a l and economic conditions and standards that at once afforded him a measure of s e l f - i n t e r e s t and placed r e s t r a i n t s on i t s excesses. In these circumstances there was no c o n t r a d i c t i o n between the goals of i n d i v i d u a l s and the interdependency of community l i f e . Rather, a durable r e l a t i o n s h i p was formed between the i n d i v i d u a l and h i s community. Population growth was absorbed i n t o a s t a b l e and accommodating s o c i a l arrangement. The s m a l l , l o c a l i z e d markets and i n d i v i d u a l c o n t r o l of economic funct i o n s were t i e d to s o c i a l imperatives that r e s i s t e d t e c h n i c a l or o r g a n i z a t i o n a l innovation i n work p r a c t i c e s . As the scale and f u n c t i o n of work continued i n e s t a b l i s h e d p a t t e r n s , the broader s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e was maintained. Therefore, recent t h e o r i e s of s o c i a l change i n pre-Revolutionary Massachusetts, drawn from concepts of crowding, s t r a t i f i -c a t i o n and c o n f l i c t , must be reconsidered or modified i n l i g h t of the s t a b i l i t y and d u r a b i l i t y of communal s o c i e t y as revealed i n the con-d i t i o n s and aims of p r o v i n c i a l l a b o r . i v TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter' Page I. PROVINCIAL SOCIETY, THE HISTORIAN AND LABOR 1 I I . THE LOCAL SETTING 16 I I I . THE RURAL ARTISAN 5 6 IV. HUSBANDMEN AND LABORERS 1 0 9 V. THE RURAL SPECIALIST 1 4 5 V I . THE COMMERCIAL SETTING AND THE BOSTON ARTISAN 1 7 9 V I I . THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ARTISAN 2 1 6 V I I I . THE UNSKILLED WORKER IN BOSTON 2 3 4 IX. GROWTH AND STABILITY IN PROVINCIAL MASSACHUSETTS: THE CASE OF LABOR 2 6 5 Appendix I. ACCOUNT SAMPLE 297 I I . BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 300 I I I . POPULATION DATA 302 IV. VALUATION OF THE SEVERAL COUNTIES IN THE PROVINCE OF MASSACHUSETTS BAY IN 1751 (Taken Verbatim from MS at MHS) 305 BIBLIOGRAPHY 307 V N O T E S Chapter Page I . PROVINCIAL SOCIETY, THE HISTORIAN AND LABOR 13 I I . THE LOCAL SETTING 50 I I I . THE RURAL ARTISAN 102 IV. HUSBANDMEN AND LABORERS 139 V. THE RURAL SPECIALIST 174 VI. THE COMMERCIAL SETTING AND THE BOSTON ARTISAN 211 V I I . THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ARTISAN 231 V I I I . THE UNSKILLED WORKER IN BOSTON 260 IX. GROWTH AND STABILITY IN PROVINCIAL MASSACHUSETTS: THE CASE OF LABOR 290 v i LIST OF MAPS Map Page 1. TOWNS OF MASSACHUSETTS, 1775 22 2. SEVENTEENTH CENTURY TOWNS OF ESSEX COUNTY 24 3. SOILS OF MASSACHUSETTS 36 4. TOWNS OF EASTERN MASSACHUSETTS 1 5 g LIST OF TABLES Table I. LAND AND POPULATION DISTRIBUTION 33 I I . LAND USE DISTRIBUTION SAMPLE 34 I I I . SOIL CHARACTERISTICS 37 IV. AGRICULTURAL LAND USE 39 V. LIVESTOCK DATA '. 40 VI. BOSTON EMPLOYMENT STATISTICS 182 v i i Acts and Resolves AAS AHR Baker BCR Boston Town Papers C i v i l L i s t C o l o n i a l Laws EHR EIHC H i s t o r i c a l Data H i s t o r i c a l S t a t i s t i c s ABBREVIATIONS Acts and Resolves, P u b l i c and P r i v a t e , of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, 1692-1787, 21 v o l s . , (Boston: 1869-1922) American A n t i q u a r i a n S o c i e t y American H i s t o r i c a l Review American Q u a r t e r l y Baker L i b r a r y Manuscripts and Archives D i v i s i o n , Harvard Graduate School of Business A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , Boston Reports of the Record Commissioners of the C i t y of Boston ( C o l o n i a l Town Meeting Records and Selectmen's Minutes) 39 v o l s , (Boston: 1876-1909) Unpublished Town Records, Manuscripts D i v i s i o n , Boston P u b l i c L i b r a r y W.H. Whitmore, ed., Massachusetts C i v i l L i s t f o r the C o l o n i a l and P r o v i n c i a l P e r i o d s , 1630-1774 (Albany, N.Y.: 1870) W.H. Whitmore, C o l o n i a l Laws of Massachusetts: Reprinted from the E d i t i o n of 1672, w i t h the Supplements to 1686 (Boston: 1889) Economic H i s t o r y Review Essex I n s t i t u t e H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n s H i s t o r i c a l Data R e l a t i n g to the C i t i e s , Towns and Counties of Massachusetts (Secretary of S t a t e , Boston: 1975) H i s t o r i c a l S t a t i s t i c s , C o l o n i a l Times to the Present (U.S. Bureau of the Census, Washington, D.C., 1960) Sec t i o n Z v x i x JEH JIH M. Arch. MHS Mass. Bay Recs. NEHGR NEQ P u b l i c O f f i c i a l s WMi J o u r n a l of Economic H i s t o r y J o u r n a l of S o c i a l H i s t o r y Massachusetts P u b l i c A r c h i v e s , State House, Boston Massachusetts H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y Records of the Governor and Company of The Massachusetts Bay i n New England, 1626-1686, 5 v o l s (Boston: 1853-4) New England H i s t o r i c a l and Genealog i c a l R e g i s t e r New England Q u a r t e r l y Robert F. Seybolt, ed., The Town O f f i c i a l s of C o l o n i a l Boston, 1620- 1775 (Cambridge: 1939) W i l l i a m and Mary Q u a r t e r l y , 3rd Se r i e s ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would l i k e to thank A l T u l l y , the supervisor of t h i s t h e s i s f o r h i s p r o f e s s i o n a l judgement and h i s demonstrated confidence i n my choice of s u b j e c t , research methods and op i n i o n s . L i k e many other D o c t o r a l Theses, t h i s one could not have been completed without the f i n a n c i a l support of the Canada C o u n c i l . I am deeply g r a t e f u l to them f o r two years of funding. My g r a t i t u d e extends to the s t a f f of the Massachusetts H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y , the Massachusetts State A r c h i v e s , and the Baker L i b r a r y A r c h i v e s D i v i s i o n , a l l i n Boston, f o r t h e i r s i n c e r e cooperativeness. F i n a l l y , I dedicate t h i s work to my w i f e Gere, f o r her a f f e c t i o n and patience. CHAPTER I PROVINCIAL SOCIETY, THE HISTORIAN AND LABOR The purpose of t h i s study i s to examine and e x p l a i n how work co n t r i b u t e d to the s t a t u s of the i n d i v i d u a l i n c o l o n i a l Massachusetts and how the d i s t r i b u t i o n of l a b o r defined the s o c i a l and economic fe a t u r e s of that s o c i e t y . The major t h r u s t of the d i s s e r t a t i o n , then, i s d e s c r i p t i v e ; i t describes v a r i e t i e s of work, the ends to which they were d i r e c t e d and the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between types of work and between work and the other s o c i a l arrangements of the community. I n e v i t a b l y , the r e c o n s t r u c t i n g of such a fundamental f e a t u r e of c o l o n i a l s o c i e t y leads beyond a narrow c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the v a r i o u s forms of work. When work i s examined i n the context of i n d i v i d u a l p r a c t i c e , f a m i l y o r g a n i z a t i o n and community involvement, the broader f e a t u r e s of 'Massachusetts s o c i e t y come i n t o focus. From the p e r s p e c t i v e of a study of work, that s o c i e t y appears f a r l e s s p o l a r i z e d - — - f a r ^ l e s s d y s f u n c t i o n a l i n i t s economic and s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s — than recent h i s t o r i a n s have argued. The s o - c a l l e d p r o v i n c i a l period of Massachusetts h i s t o r y was more than a p o l i t i c a l epoch; i t i s e x p e c i a l l y s u i t a b l e f o r an a n a l y s i s of work because i t was a l s o a p e r i o d of r e l a t i v e l y s t a b l e s o c i a l and economic c o n d i t i o n s . The g r a n t i n g of the 1691 Charter marked the end of the P u r i t a n Commonwealth w i t h i t s frequent c y c l e s of i n s t i t u t i o n a l 1 2 experimentation and adjustment; the years f o l l o w i n g 1765 brought w i t h them i n t e n s i f i e d s o c i a l and economic d i s l o c a t i o n along w i t h p o l i t i c a l and c o n s t i t u t i o n a l c o n f l i c t . The decades from 1690 to 1765 r e v e a l a community i n possession of i t s own s p e c i a l s o c i a l . and_ economic c h a r a c t e r i s -t i c s . ^ I t was an age of r e l a t i v e p o l i t i c a l s t a b i l i t y and t r a n q u i l i t y d uring which the s o c i a l concepts and experiences of the founding and e a r l y generations had evolved and were expressed i n the p r i n c i p a l f e a t u r e s of p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y . In broad terms, p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts was a s o c i e t y that was organized under P u r i t a n p r i n c i p l e s 2 and which was p r e - i n d u s t r i a l and a g r a r i a n , and e t h n i c a l l y homogeneous. At the beginning of the eighteenth century the p o p u l a t i o n of Massachusetts was mostly n a t i v e born and most i n h a b i t a n t s l i v e d w i t h i n 3 a few m i l e s of t h e i r b i r t h p l a c e s . C u l t u r a l and s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s such as r e l i g i o n , education, d o m i c i l e and f a m i l y , economy and work were e s t a b l i s h e d , as were laws and the mechanisms f o r a d m i n i s t e r i n g them. The form and f u n c t i o n of l o c a l government were s t a b l e ; the economic base of the s o c i e t y was w e l l organized, as a s t a b l e under-pi n n i n g f o r the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e . Many of the e a r l i e r i d e a l s had been modified to s u i t the r e a l i t i e s of the m a t e r i a l world and the r e l i g i o u s , p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l expectations of the founders had been r e c o n c i l e d w i t h the economic experience of successive generations. In l a r g e measure, the s o c i a l and r e l i g i o u s standards of the f i r s t generation had been maintained w i t h i n the context of the economic l i f e of e a r l y 4 eighteenth century s o c i e t y . 3 As the eighteenth century unfolded the v a r i o u s i n s t i t u t i o n s of t h i s s o c i e t y would have to accommodate the c o n t i n u i n g dynamics of change. P e r i o d i c economic f l u c t u a t i o n and successive bouts of currency i n f l a t i o n , d e f l a t i o n and d e v a l u a t i o n would a f f l i c t the province. The s o c i a l , c u l t u r a l and p o l i t i c a l causes and r a m i f i c a t i o n s of the Great Awakening were other signs of f l u x and change w i t h i n the society.\"' For the fundamental s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l and economic i n s t i t u t i o n s and p r a c t i c e s to endure through the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , perhaps the g r e a t e s t t e s t of those i n s t i t u t i o n s would be p o p u l a t i o n growth and t e r r i t o r i a l expansion. The p o p u l a t i o n of Massachusetts increased from 49,000 i n 1690 to 227,000 i n 1760. In the process of absorbing that f o u r - f o l d i n c r e a s e , the s o c i e t y of the province was o b l i g e d to i n t e n s i f y and broaden i t s use of land to accommodate the simple pressure of numbers on e x i s t i n g f a c i l i t i e s and at the same time transmit i t s i n s t i t u t i o n a l format to successive generations. Growth over time and the f o r c e of that growth on the e x i s t i n g order and i t s values c o n s t i t u t e d the most potent agent of change i n p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y . Serious questions con-cerning the s o c i a l h i s t o r y of Massachusetts have a r i s e n from the phenomenon of q u a n t i t a t i v e growth i n p o p u l a t i o n : could that s o c i e t y d e f l e c t or absorb the changes i m p l i c i t i n r a p i d growth and r e t a i n i t s s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ? Moreover, i f the s o c i e t y d i d s u r v i v e i n t a c t the e f f e c t s of p o p u l a t i o n expansion as w e l l as economic f l u c t u a t i o n and s o c i o - c u l t u r a l i n n o v a t i o n , how was that achieved? 4 Were the i n s t i t u t i o n s and t r a d i t i o n s of t h i s s o c i e t y s u f f i c i e n t l y s t rong, p r a c t i c a l and f l e x i b l e to envelop the processes of growth and p o t e n t i a l change and remain i n t a c t ? Or d i d they y i e l d to these f o r c e s and undergo change themselves? S o c i a l h i s t o r i a n s of pre-Revolutionary eighteenth century Massachusetts r e c e n t l y have d e a l t e x t e n s i v e l y and voluminously w i t h those questions. In order to understand p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y , h i s t o r i a n s have examined the f o r c e s of s t a b i l i t y and change as they made contact w i t h each other over time. They have done so by i s o l a t i n g the s o c i e t y ' s b a s i c i n s t i t u t i o n s , . the r e p o s i t o r i e s and agencies of the s o c i e t y ' s s o c i o - c u l t u r a l and economic t r a d i t i o n s and arrangements. These b a s i c i n s t i t u t i o n s have been i d e n t i f i e d as the i n d i v i d u a l , the f a m i l y , the church and the l o c a l community; together, these elements c o n s t i t u t e d the l a r g e r i n s t i t u t i o n , Massachusetts. H i s t o r i a n s have te s t e d those i n s t i t u t i o n s w i t h v a r i o u s approaches, l o o k i n g f o r s t a b i l i t y and c o n t i n u i t y or f l u x and change and f i n d i n g c o n d i t i o n s that range from consensual communalism to p l u r a l i s m and extreme i n d i v i d u a l i s m , from economic e q u a l i t y to d i s p a r i t y , s t r a t i f i c a t i o n and fragmentation, and from s t a b l e c o n t i n u i t y to crowding, d i m i n u t i o n of economic s t a t u s , communal c o n f l i c t and d i s s o l u t i o n of the t r a d i t i o n a l order. For most of these a n a l y s t s , land and p o p u l a t i o n have been key elements i n the question of c o n t i n u i t y versus change. Others have concluded that r e l i g i o u s d e c l i n e permitted the i n d i v i d u a l to abandon h i s seventeenth century corporate communal ways to become the a c q u i s i t i v e s e l f - d i r e c t e d m a t e r i a l i s t of the nineteenth century.^ 5 From the conclusions of demographic and economic s t u d i e s there has emerged disagreement on the nature,.meaning, form and e f f e c t s of change or changing f a c t o r s . There i s , however, some agreement on the f a c t that p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts began w i t h a p a t t e r n of s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s that had emerged from the seventeenth century experiences of P u r i t a n s o c i e t y . Another shared f e a t u r e of these s t u d i e s i s that they have each focused on some aspect of l i f e and s o c i e t y that a f f e c t e d g a l l or most members of the p r o v i n c i a l community. One very common, but commonly overlooked f e a t u r e of t h i s s o c i e t y i s work. Work not only a f f e c t e d a l l members of the Massachusetts community but i t co i n c i d e d w i t h a l l the subsequent v a l u e s , conduct and r e l a t i o n s .among and between the r e s i d e n t s of the province. Everyone d i d or was expected to work. From the moment when a c h i l d reached a stage i n i t s growth where i t could s a f e l y and p r o d u c t i v e l y perform a task, u n t i l the time when o l d age or i n f i r m i t y precluded p h y s i c a l endeavour, men and women worked. That such an obvious and fundamental f a c t of l i f e has been l a r g e l y overlooked by the s o c i a l h i s t o r i a n s of p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts r e f l e c t s acknowledge-ment of work's u n i v e r s a l and b a s i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , as much as i t does the h i s t o r i a n ' s b i a s e s . S o c i a l h i s t o r i a n s have been concerned w i t h work as a t a c i t l y acknowledged component of the other s o c i a l f a c t o r s they have examined. Work, as i t was performed, by whom and i n what circumstances, has been l e f t out of most of the c r i t i c a l s t u d i e s of p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y . L i v e l i h o o d , i t s means, c o n d i t i o n s , aims and 6 r e s u l t s has been gauged i n terms of demographic, economic and p o l i t i c a l c o nclusions and not i n terms of work as a f a c t o r of l i v e l i h o o d . Yet work was more than a simple means of l i v e l i h o o d . I t was that s i n g l e a c t i v i t y from which a l l subsequent s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n s flowed or to which a l l other s o c i a l f a c t o r s were d i r e c t e d . I t was an economic n e c e s s i t y , to be sure, but i t s p a r t i c u l a r q u a l i t i e s o f t e n r e f l e c t e d the s o c i a l p o s i t i o n , opportunity and purposes of the i n d i v i d u a l . I t s importance was c u l t u r a l as w e l l as s o c i a l and economic; i t was seen as part of the general education of the corporate c i t i z e n of e a r l y Massachusetts. Along w i t h moral, s o c i a l , r e l i g i o u s and s c h o l a s t i c t r a i n i n g , the a c q u i s i t i o n of a v o c a t i o n a l s k i l l or f u n c t i o n and i t s a p p l i c a t i o n were presumed to make the c i t i z e n more complete and more 9 i n harmony w i t h s o c i e t y ' s aims and the community's w e l f a r e . Work was something to be maintained and c u l t i v a t e d as one's c o n t r i b u t i o n to i n d i v i d u a l and c o l l e c t i v e s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y . There was no l e i s u r e d c l a s s i n p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y . Among the a f f l u e n t overseas merchants, i n v e s t o r s , managers and brokers, and the province's p o l i t i c a l and j u d i c i a l c ustodians, that i s , the members of the General Court and l o c a l Town Meetings, work was as r e g u l a r and as purposeful as i t was f o r a farm l a b o r e r . \" ^ Even w i t h s u f f i c i e n t means to forego productive work f o r income, the p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y few r i c h men i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts spent long working hours at t h e i r desks, i n t h e i r shops, o f f i c e s and warehouses or i n p u b l i c s e r v i c e . I d l e n e s s , s t r i c t l y speaking, was not permitted i n the d o c t r i n e of P u r i t a n s o c i a l o r g a n i z -7 a t i o n . Indeed, i d l e n e s s was unlawful as w e l l as m o r a l l y r e p r e h e n s i b l e . T / ) 1 . 11 Idleness was a vxce. The concept of i d l e n e s s and the importance of i t s prevention were major i n d i c a t o r s of t h i s s o c i e t y ' s regard f o r work. \" I d l e n e s s \" meant both unemployment and s o c i a l , moral or r e l i g i o u s t r a n s g r e s s i o n or i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . The concepts were at once d i s t i n c t and synonymous. To be unemployed was to v i o l a t e the moral code of s o c i e t y . C e r t a i n l y a person could be without employment and s t i l l m a intain a c l o s e obedience to the s o c i e t y ' s moral and s p i r i t u a l standards. But prolonged i d l e n e s s of t h i s s o r t would, i t was b e l i e v e d , e v e n t u a l l y lead to moral d i s s i p a t i o n . I d l e n e s s , i n l e g a l and s o c i a l concept and terminology a l s o was given to mean a sl a c k e n i n g or abandonment of proper s o c i a l , moral and s p i r i t u a l a t t i t u d e and behaviour.. To be i d l e , i n that sense, d i d not immed-i a t e l y imply v o c a t i o n a l s l o t h or i n s u f f i c i e n c y ; but again, i t was thought, moral i d l e n e s s would encourage v o c a t i o n a l i d l e n e s s . So, by l e g a l dictum and w i t h a d m i n i s t r a t i v e apparatus and s o c i a l and e c c l e s -i a s t i c a l persuasion, e i t h e r or both of these forms of i d l e n e s s were 12 to be avoided, prevented or c o r r e c t e d . I f s o c i a l and moral a t t i t u d e and behavior were to be regulated to a s t a b l e conformity, work was an important means of app l y i n g the c o n t r o l s . But law and persuasion were more u s e f u l as c o r r e c t i v e s than as preventives. What operated best i n minimizing i d l e n e s s was a s o c i a l and economic atmosphere that encouraged work — where work was both necessary f o r a l l i n h a b i t a n t s and p e r s o n a l l y 8 f u l f i l l i n g and rewarding. To these ends the P u r i t a n founders of Massachusetts e x p l o i t e d the p h y s i c a l p r o p e r t i e s of the colony. By com-b i n i n g the congregational purposes of settlement w i t h economic n e c e s s i t y , they adapted the s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l aims they sought to pursue to the geographical landscape of Massachusetts. They e s t a b l i s h e d a p a t t e r n of s o c i a l and economic o r g a n i z a t i o n that survived and p e r s i s t e d i n the form of corporate communities — the \"town\" — which included wide-spread i n d i v i d u a l land h o l d i n g . And the p o l i c y of l e g i s l a t i n g and or g a n i z i n g personal economic r e s p o n s i b i l i t y was accomplished by the p r a c t i c e of corporate land grants, so that the i n d i v i d u a l was 13 simultaneously part of a community. In t h i s s e t t i n g the i n d i v i d u a l was made a b s o l u t e l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r h i s own and h i s f a m i l y ' s support; at the same time he was compelled to be responsive to the c o l l e c t i v e s o c i a l , moral and economic needs and demands of h i s community, which was i n Massachusetts, normally the a g r i c u l t u r a l town. The b a s i s f o r work was e s t a b l i s h e d i n e a r l y Massachusetts as an a c t i v i t y that was h i g h l y p e r s o n a l i z e d and served the d i r e c t , v i s i b l e needs of the worker w i t h i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n a l framework of a l o c a l a g r i c u l t u r a l community. The i n d i v i d u a l farm served as the common means of subsistence. But i f the subsistence farm encouraged a s p i r i t and a c t i v i t y of work i t could not provide f o r the complete m a t e r i a l needs of the i n d i v i d u a l farmer. Only i n the context of shared and exchanged work h a b i t s , s k i l l s and m a t e r i a l s could the independent farmer s u r v i v e and succeed. Only i n the l a r g e r , l o c a l community could the i n d i v i d u a l f i n d the 9 opportunity to supply himself and h i s f a m i l y w i t h the goods and s e r v i c e s h i s farm could not provide. Only there could he f i n d the o u t l e t s f o r h i s own goods and s e r v i c e s and the means to complete h i s l i v e l i h o o d . The small subsistence farm served to bind the i n d i v i d -u a l to a p r o p r i e t a r y h a b i t of work; i t s l i m i t a t i o n s o b l i g e d him to 14 cooperate i n a wider economic and labor sphere. The h i s t o r i c a l p i c t u r e of p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts man as a s m a l l - s c a l e , subsistence and non-commercial farmer i s accurate to the extent that the m a j o r i t y of the p o p u l a t i o n f i t t e d i n t o the p a t t e r n described above. What that p i c t u r e has omitted i s the f a c t that the subsistence farmer was not only a farmer but a s o c i a l and economic p a r t i c i p a n t i n an extensive and m u l t i f a c e t e d working environment, one that created work h a b i t s and o p p o r t u n i t i e s that included but exceeded the subsistence f a r m . ^ One i m p l i c a t i o n of t h i s g e n e r a l i z a t i o n a r i s e s immediately: the circumstances of subsistence farming and i t s b a s i c i n f l u e n c e on work patte r n s w i l l not apply to n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l Boston. In that sense, t h i s study w i l l observe two d i s t i n c t economies and perhaps two s o c i e t i e s . By making the d i s t i n c t i o n between a g r i c u l t u r a l s o c i e t y and the commercial economy of Boston, and by comparing the r e s p e c t i v e patterns of work i n those s e t t i n g s j c onclusions can be drawn of the e f f e c t s of l o c a t i o n on work. In the eighteenth century the word \" l a b o r \" was used mostly as a verb, o c c a s i o n a l l y as a possessive noun and never as a c o l l e c t i v e pronoun. There were, of course, \" l a b o r i n g men\" and \" l a b o r e r s , \" but \" l a b o r , \" as d e f i n i n g a socio-economic or v o c a t i o n a l p l u r a l i t y , was not a concept i n use i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts. The p r a c t i c e of r e f e r r i n g to c e r t a i n groups as \" l a b o r \" to i d e n t i f y those groups as having c e r t a i n shared socio-economic and p o l i t i c a l q u a l i t i e s as determined by oc c u p a t i o n a l status d i d not occur i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts. S o c i a l d i s t i n c t i o n s were observed by contemporaries as being derived from the economic and occupational status and a c t i v i t y of i n d i v i d u a l s , but to merchants, m i n i s t e r s and lawmakers, the term \"workman,\" f o r example, r e f e r r e d more o f t e n only to a c e r t a i n use of labor than to a s o c i a l c l a s s . There were references to s o c i a l s t a t u s to be made w i t h c e r t a i n o c c u p a t i o n a l t i t l e s and a c t i v i t i e s but g e n e r a l l y , to contemporaries, the idea of d i s t i n g u i s h i n g one segment of the p o p u l a t i o n as \" l a b o r \" was i m p r a c t i c a b l e . This was so because of v o c a t i o n a l and socio-economic m o b i l i t y and because of the h i g h l y f l u i d and p e r s o n a l i z e d nature of work. In t h i s study \" l a b o r \" w i l l be used as much as p o s s i b l e as i t was used by contemporaries and not as a noun to r e f e r to a l l those who worked.. I t w i l l i n c l u d e p r o f e s s i o n a l s , l a r g e merchants, businessmen and churchmen only to the extent that these m i n o r i t i e s i n f l u e n c e d or were a f f e c t e d by the dominant work a c t i v i t i e s and economies of the m a j o r i t y . S i m i l a r l y , t h i s study w i l l d e a l w i t h s l a v e r y , s e r v i t u d e and ap p r e n t i c e s h i p not as separate l a b o r modes, but as they too were inv o l v e d i n the dominant labor environment. The p r i n c i p a l focus of t h i s examination w i l l be on the i n d i v i d u a l and r e l a t e d c o l l e c t i v e means of economic exchange through the medium of l a b o r . Because of i t s s p e c i a l circumstances, most l a b o r i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts was \" f r e e \" ; that i s , l a b o r was disposed of and exchanged f r e e l y and independently by i t s possessor. The l a b o r of i n d i v i d u a l s was not owned by others i n any r e a l sense or to any s i g n i f i c a n t 16 degree. So f a r , f r e e labor i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts has been l a r g e l y ignored by h i s t o r i a n s p a r t l y because i t has been presumed not to represent a d e f i n a b l e and u s e f u l socio-economic e l e m e n t . ^ When lab o r has been studied i t has concentrated on a p p r e n t i c e s h i p , indentured s e r v i t u d e and s l a v e r y , as these represent d e f i n i t e s o c i a l 18 exceptions to the m o n o l i t h i c whole of p r o v i n c i a l working l i f e . Otherwise, f r e e l a b o r has been considered i n l i g h t of e i t h e r an a n t i q u a r i a n n o v e l t y , to study a vanished s o c i a l type such as the \"craftsman\" f o r example, or as a footnote to general socio-economic h i s t o r y , or more r e c e n t l y as an adjunct to poverty themes or as an 19 organized component i n Revolutionary a c t i v i t y . But i t was the very pervasive and u n i v e r s a l , q u a l i t i e s of f r e e l a b o r i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts that make i t an important means of examination of the s o c i a l s t a t e of eighteenth century Massachusetts. Therefore, t h i s study w i l l observe how people worked and why they d i d so. The broader o b j e c t i v e w i l l be to f i t those observations to the wider s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n s of l i f e i n p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y . As work and s o c i e t y are examined i n t h i s study, something w i l l be s a i d about the e f f e c t s 12 of growth on the s t r u c t u r e of s o c i e t y and the s o c i e t y ' s responses to those other i s s u e s of change that have been r a i s e d by h i s t o r i a n s . But the p r i n c i p a l aim of t h i s examination, i n the choice of i t s s u b j e c t , w i l l be to introduce work as a s o c i a l element i n the h i s t o r i o g r a p h y of pre-Revolutionary Massachusetts; and to d e s c r i b e those f e a t u r e s of work which r e v e a l c e r t a i n other q u a l i t i e s of community l i f e . R ecently, a c a l l was made to the h i s t o r i a n s of e a r l y America to \"develop modest t h e o r i e s that a i d them i n t h e i r r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of the i n t e r n a l s t r u c t u r e s of i n d i v i d u a l s o c i e t i e s . \" Richard Beeman went on to c r i t i c i z e the i n d i s c r i m i n a t e use of s o c i a l science methodology i n the study of the \"community\" i n e a r l y America: Much of the work on c o l o n i a l s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e . . . i s drawn from the s t r a t i f i c a t i o n t h e o r i e s of modern urban s o c i o l o g y , models which tend to be based on complex, i n t e n s i v e l y c a p i t a l i s t s o c i e t i e s and which may not be s u i t e d to the a n a l y s i s of some of the t r a d i t i o n a l i s t elements of seventeenth and eighteenth century American s o c i e t y . 20 This present study w i l l heed BeemanVs c r i t e r i a and w i l l approach the h i s t o r y of work i n e a r l y Massachusetts on the theory that work was a t r a d i t i o n a l element of the i n t e r n a l s t r u c t u r e of that p r e - i n d u s t r i a l s o c i e t y , and that the study of work w i l l add a c l e a r e r understanding of the l i v e s of the i n h a b i t a n t s of p r o v i n c i a l communities. 13 NOTES CHAPTER I James Truslow Adams, P r o v i n c i a l S o c i e t y , 1690-1763 (New York: 1927); E v a r t s B . Greene, P r o v i n c i a l America, 1690-1740 (New York: 1905). 2 Jack P. Greene, \"Autonomy and S t a b i l i t y : New England and the B r i t i s h C o l o n i a l Experience,\" J.S.H. (1974), pp. 171-194; Vernon L. P a r r i n g t o n , The C o l o n i a l Mind, V o l . 1 of Main Currents i n American Thought (New York: 1927). P a r r i n g t o n c a l l e d p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts \" u n d i s t i n g u i s h e d . . . rude and drab i n i t s i n s u l a r i t y , \" p. 133. 3 J . P o t t e r , \"The Growth of P o p u l a t i o n i n America, 1700-1860\" i n Glass and E v e r s l e y , eds., P o p u l a t i o n i n H i s t o r y (London: 1965), PP. 636ff.J E t h e l S. B o l t o n , \"Immigrants to New England, 1700-75,\" EIHC, V o l s . 63-67 (1927-31); C l i f f o r d K. Shipton, \"Immigration to New England, 1680-1740,\" J o u r n a l of P o l . Economy 44 (1936), pp. 225-39. 4 Perry M i l l e r , The New England Mind: From Colony to Province (Cambridge, Mass.: 1953), pp. 40-52, 395-480; f o r the laws governing l o c a l a u t h o r i t y , poverty, crime, residence and v o t i n g requirements, education, f a m i l y r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , p u b l i c r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , e t c . , see the Indexes of Mass. Bay Recs., V o l s . 1-5; C o l o n i a l Laws; Acts and Resolves, V o l s . 1-5. A comparison between the seventeenth and eighteenth c e n t u r i e s r e v e a l s very l i t t l e o r i g i n a l enactment on major laws and very l i t t l e r e v i s i o n a f t e r 1692. See a l s o Greene, \"Autonomy and S t a b i l i t y . \" ^Edwin Gaustad, The Great Awakening i n New England (New York: 1957), pp. 102-125. Appendix I I I , i . ^Richard Beeman, \"The New S o c i a l H i s t o r y and the Search f o r 'Community' i n C o l o n i a l America,\" American Q u a r t e r l y 29 (1977), pp. 422-43; Richard Dunn, \"The S o c i a l H i s t o r y of E a r l y New England,\" AQ_ 24 (1972), pp. 661-679; Rhys Isaac, \"Order and Growth, A u t h o r i t y and Meaning i n C o l o n i a l New England,\" AHR 76 (1971), pp. 728-37; John M u r r i n , \"Review Essay,\" H i s t o r y and Theory I I (1972), pp. 226-75. Together, these c r i t i c a l review essays give a very comprehensive 14 summary of the recent s o c i a l h i s t o r i o g r a p h y of eighteenth century Massachusetts. The major works d e a l t w i t h are those of Bushman, Demos, Greven, L o c k r i d g e , Henretta and Zuckerman. (See B i b l i o g r a p h y at the end of t h i s study). I b i d . , f o r a c r i t i c i s m of the n o t i o n of m a t u r i t y and s t a b i l i t y i n e a r l y p r o v i n c i a l h i s t o r y see esp. Dunn, \"The S o c i a l H i s t o r y \" ; f o r a c r i t i c i s m of the narrowness of a l l recent s o c i a l h i s t o r i o g r a p h y see Beeman, \"The New S o c i a l H i s t o r y . \" 9 Bernard B a i l y n , Education i n the Forming of E a r l y American Society (Chapel H i l l : 1960), esp. pp. 53-99. \"^J.R.T. Hughes, S o c i a l C o n t r o l i n the C o l o n i a l Economy ( C h a r l o t t e s v i l l e , Va.; 1976). For examples of the work h a b i t s of prominent men, see F r a n c i s G. Walett, The D i a r y of Ebenezer Parkman (Worcester, Ma.: 1974); MHS MSS \"Robert Treat Paine Papers\"; \" E z e k i a l P r i c e Papers\"; \"Hancock Papers\"; \"Belknap Papers.\" For a t t i t u d e s , see J.E. Crowley, This Sheba S e l f : The C o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of Economic L i f e i n Eighteenth Century America (Baltimore: 1974). \"'\"''\"Acts and Resolves, V o l . I , pp. 378-81, V o l . I I , pp. 47, 232, 385. For the seventeenth century a n t i - i d l e n e s s laws see C o l o n i a l Laws, pp. 26, 94 and Mass Bay Recs. passim. 12 I b i d . , George L. Haskins, Law and A u t h o r i t y i n E a r l y Massachusetts (New York: 1965). 13 Sumner C h i l t o n P o w e l l , P u r i t a n V i l l a g e : The Formation of a New England Town (Wesleyan: 1963), pp. 178-186; Kenneth L o c k r i d g e , A New England Town: The F i r s t Hundred Years (New York: 1970), pp. 3-36, 57-78. For the o r i g i n s of the farm-town settlement p a t t e r n i n Plymouth Colony see D a r r e t t B. Rutman, Husbandmen of Plymouth, Farms and V i l l a g e s i n the Old Colony, 1620-1690 (Boston: 1967). 14 E.G. N e l l i s , \"Labor and Community i n Massachusetts Bay: 1630-1660,\" Labor H i s t o r y 18 (1977), pp. 525-44. \"^A general d i s c u s s i o n , of the small s c a l e farmer as the \" t y p i c a l \" Massachusetts r e s i d e n t i n the eighteenth century can be found i n J.T. Main, The S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e of Revolutionary America ( P r i n c e t o n : 1965), pp. 7-43, esp. p. 27. Main e r r s , however, when he presumes the 60% to 90% (depending on r e g i o n a l sample) of the p o p u l a t i o n which held land to be f u l l - t i m e farmers and the remainder to be the l o c a l town merchant, a r t i s a n and l a b o r i n g c l a s s e s . The o c c u p a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e was not q u i t e so r i g i d l y d e l i n e a t e d ; see Chapters 3-5 below. A b e t t e r example 15 of the a g r i c u l t u r a l l i m i t a t i o n s of the contemporary subsistence farm i s P.W. B i d w e l l and John Falconer, H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e i n the Northern United S t a t e s , 1620-1860 (Washington: 1925), pp. 130-133. The dual or m u l t i - o c c u p a t i o n a l s t a t u s of the \" t y p i c a l farmer\" i s w e l l defined i n B i d w e l l , R u r a l Economy i n New England ( H a r t f o r d : 1916), esp. pp. 251 f f . 16 Slaves d i d not c o n s t i t u t e more than 3% of the Massachusetts p o p u l a t i o n i n the eighteenth century; see Appendix I I I . On the r e l a t i v e l y l i m i t e d i n c i d e n c e of white s e r v i t u d e see Abbot L. Smith, C o l o n i s t s i n Bondage (New York: 1947), pp. 4, 28-29. •^Richard B. M o r r i s , \"American Labor H i s t o r y P r i o r to the C i v i l War: Sources and O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r Pvesearch,\" Labor H i s t o r y I (1960), pp. 308-18. M o r r i s ' s own work, Government and Labor i n E a r l y America (New York: 1946), i s an exception so f a r as i t s p a r t i c u l a r t h e s i s goes. 18 Smith, C o l o n i s t s i n Bondage; Marcus Jernegen, Laboring and Dependent Classes i n C o l o n i a l America (Chicago: 1931). These set the tone f o r many subsequent monographs and p a r t i c u l a r s t u d i e s . I t i s no accident t h a t most s t u d i e s of l a b o r , i n t h i s context ( i . e . , bonded l a b o r ) , are set i n the Chesapeake and South. See M o r r i s , \"American Labor H i s t o r y . \" 19 On poverty and l a b o r see Alan K u l i k o f f , \"The Progress of I n e q u a l i t y i n Revolutionary Boston,\" WMQ 28 (1971), pp. 375-412; J.A. Henretta, \"Economic Development and S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e i n C o l o n i a l Boston,\" WMQ 22 (1965), pp. 75-92. On the r o l e of \"organized\" l a b o r i n R e v o l u t i o n a r y a c t i v i t y see e s p e c i a l l y P a u l i n e Maier, From Resistance to R e v o l u t i o n (New York: 1972); M o r r i s , Government and Labor; Jesse Lemisch, \"Jack Tar i n the S t r e e t s : Merchant Seamen i n the P o l i t i c s of Revolutionary America,\" WMQ 25 (1968), pp. 371-407, and \"The White Oaks, Jack Tar and the Concept of the I n a r t i c u l a t e , \" WMQ 29 (1972), pp. 109-142. Beeman, \"The New S o c i a l H i s t o r y , \" pp. 426-428. 16 CHAPTER I I THE LOCAL SETTING Work was one element w i t h i n a l a r g e r sphere of s o c i a l i n s t i t u -t i o n s . Therefore, an examination of the s o c i a l s e t t i n g f o r work becomes an e f f e c t i v e means of e s t a b l i s h i n g a comprehensive background f o r the ways i n which work patterns developed and were maintained i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts. In that regard i t i s important to t h i s study to d i s c u s s the general o u t l i n e s of the province's economy and s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n before t u r n i n g to the a g r i c u l t u r a l and l o c a l s o c i e t i e s i n which a narrower s e t t i n g f o r work can be considered. A conventional explanation of the o v e r a l l economy of pre-Revolutionary Massachusetts proceeds from.the standpoint of the province's s t a t u s as a t r a d i n g s o c i e t y . In b r i e f o u t l i n e , that view notes that from an e a r l y date i n i t s h i s t o r y and throughout the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d Massachusetts produced such export commodities as timber, lumber, s h i p s , b a r r e l s , l e a t h e r , f i s h , s a l t , r e f i n e d sugar and rum. A l i m i t e d surplus of. a g r i c u l t u r a l products was a l s o exported as revenue-producing goods: beef, pork, mutton, f l a x and hemp, some l i v e horses and c a t t l e and o c c a s i o n a l l y some g r a i n s and f l o u r . The commercial merchants of Boston, Salem and Newbury operated a l a r g e s h ipping f l e e t which enjoyed a s i g n i f i c a n t share of the Empire's c a r r y i n g trade and which y i e l d e d c a p i t a l f o r l o c a l merchants and 17 i n v e s t o r s . The port towns of the province contained businessmen who served e x c l u s i v e l y and e x t e n s i v e l y as agents and i n s u r e r s f o r B r i t i s h maritime commerce. In terms of d i r e c t t r a d e , Massachusetts merchants d e a l t w i t h England, I r e l a n d , the West In d i e s and a l l of mainland North America, and the province was an important sector and l i n k a g e i n the B r i t i s h i m p e r i a l economic network as a center f o r l o g i s t i c a l and f i n a n c i a l s e r v i c e s . R e c i p r o c a l l y , i t served as a market f o r B r i t i s h manufactured goods.''\" In o u t l i n e that i s the conventional e x p l a n a t i o n of the economy of pre-Revolutionary Massachusetts. At l e a s t so f a r as i t s cosmopolitan r o l e was concerned, t h i s v i s i b l e and l a r g e l y e x t e r n a l economy of Massachusetts no doubt i n f l u e n c e d the c o n d i t i o n s f o r work i n the province; and i t i s c e r t a i n that the I m p e r i a l markets f o r Massachusetts products provided c a p i t a l f o r p r o v i n c i a l investment i n l o c a l e n t e r p r i s e s and that p r o f i t s from imported merchandise created f u r t h e r support f o r p r o v i n c i a l i n d u s t r i e s . Whether the province was a v i c t i m of a d e l i b e r a t e p o l i c y of r e s t r i c t i v e B r i t i s h m e r c a n t i l i s m or subject to an i n f o r m a l v a r i a n t of I m p e r i a l economic p r o t e c t i o n i s m i s a t o p i c much discussed by economic h i s t o r i a n s of c o l o n i a l America and the f i r s t B r i t i s h Empire; and from these c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l questions have been addressed to the place and f u n c t i o n 2 of Massachusetts i n the economy of Empire. I n t e r p r e t e r s of eighteenth century Massachusetts s o c i e t y f r e q u e n t l y have sought to gauge the e f f e c t s of trade on s o c i a l and economic c o n d i t i o n s i n the province. 18 So f a r as the economic s e t t i n g f o r work i s concerned, much can be learned of t h i s s o c i e t y by posing questions such as, was Massachusetts a \"debtor\" s o c i e t y — that i s , d i d the value of i t s imports exceed that of i t s exports? Was production of a wider range of l o c a l l y or i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y marketable manufactured items retarded by B r i t i s h p o l i c y and c o n t r o l ? Was there growth, s t a g n a t i o n or d i m i n u t i o n i n 3 the measured wealth of Massachusetts? But economic data f o r the pe r i o d are fragmentary and i t appears u n l i k e l y that an accurate d e s c r i p t i o n can be obtained f o r the p r e c i s e workings of the Massachusetts economy.• I t i s impossible to enumerate or evaluate a \"gross product\" f o r eighteenth century Massachusetts, and \"standards of l i v i n g \" f o r t h i s s o c i e t y are d i f f i c u l t to measure, 4 l e t alone f i x . Yet h i s t o r i a n s have continued to examine the behavior of the p r o v i n c i a l economy by r e g u l a r reference to i t s performance w i t h i n the t r a d i n g system of the B r i t i s h Empire. By doing so they have made i m p l i c i t assessments of the domestic economic and s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n s of the province. In t r u t h , p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y was supported by two economies which were d i s t i n c t and separate at one l e v e l of op e r a t i o n and only p a r t l y r e l a t e d at another. At the l e v e l of m e r c a n t i l e economic a c t i v i t y , commercial towns and c l a s s e s d i d evolve and e s t a b l i s h them-selves i n Massachusetts. Fortunes were made and some were broken, money and c r e d i t c i r c u l a t e d and an.economy of manufacturing, tra d e , commerce and investment f l o u r i s h e d and receded c y c l i c a l l y over time i n the c o a s t a l towns of the province. But t h i s m e r c a n t i l e - t r a d e f e a t u r e d i d not represent the dominant economic mode of the s o c i e t y . ^ Nor d i d i t s mechanisms occupy the m a j o r i t y of the p o p u l a t i o n , d i r e c t l y or otherwise. In terms of the province's i n t e r n a l economy, the merchants, t r a d e r s , craftsmen and workers of Boston, Salem, Newburyport and elsewhere were simply the most commercial components of Massachusetts economic s o c i e t y . Behind the c o a s t a l maritime and m e r c a n t i l e conglomeration of warehouses, workshops, docks and ships l a y the a g r i c u l t u r a l h eartland of p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts. I t i s not p o s s i b l e to say what exact p r o p o r t i o n of the wealth of the province was d e r i v e d from e x t e r n a l trade and commerce but i t can be shown that the economic a c t i v i t y that sustained the m a j o r i t y of the p o p u l a t i o n was a g r i c u l t u r e . In terms of geography and p o p u l a t i o n d i s t r i b u t i o n , c u l t u r a l , s o c i a l and economic standards and performance, and i n view of m a j o r i t y p a r t i c i p a t i o n , p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts was an a g r a r i a n s o c i e t y founded on the b a s i s of an a g r i c u l t u r a l subsistance 7 economy. The demographic d i s t i n c t i o n between the \"two economies,\" and the dominance of agrarianism was revealed by the f a c t that the province contained only three major commercial entrepot p o r t s : Boston, Salem and Newbury-Newburyport, and Boston was the only port devoted e n t i r e l y to n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l economic f u n c t i o n . At no time between 1700 and 1770 d i d the combined s i z e of these towns exceed 15% of the t o t a l Massachusetts p o p u l a t i o n . F i s h i n g , which sustained the working populations of p o r t i o n s of the seaboard was concentrated i n such 20 towns as Gloucester, Marblehead, Plymouth and Newbury. The p o p u l a t i o n of these, and other p r i m a r i l y f i s h i n g communities c o n s t i t u t e d l e s s than 9 a tenth of the whole. And a great many fishermen were a l s o , con-c u r r e n t l y , s m a l l - s c a l e farmers. In broad o u t l i n e then, l e s s than a quarter of the people of Massachusetts gained t h e i r p r i n c i p a l l i v e l i -hoods from the commercial economies of the po r t s or from f i s h i n g . C e r t a i n l y there was a convergence of economic f u n c t i o n i n the two s e c t o r s . Some surplus farm produce, g r a i n s , l i v e s t o c k , meats and hides d i d f i n d t h e i r way i n t o Boston, Salem and other c o a s t a l towns. Timber, sawn lumber, s a l t and some metal ores were found and processed w i t h i n most areas of eastern Massachusetts, as par t of the economic produce of farms and r u r a l towns; and some of these products were shipped to the coast. S i m i l a r l y , the imported manufactured goods, which entered mainly at Boston, were d i s t r i b u t e d and marketed through a network of connected t r a d e r s and merchants who formed a province-wide system of i n t e r n a l commerce.^ But the d i s t i n c t i v e f e a t u r e s of the l a b o r economy of Boston and Salem were s h i p p i n g , s h i p b u i l d i n g , d i s t i l l i n g , l e a t h e r working and other e x p o r t — r e l a t e d i n d u s t r i e s which, along w i t h p u r e l y l o c a l business, h e l d no d i r e c t a l l i a n c e w i t h the economic and working c o n d i t i o n s of the province's a g r i c u l t u r a l towns. In the r u r a l towns the labor economy revolved around i n d i v i d -u a l l y - o p e r a t e d subsistence farms and the l o c a l , domestic support economy r e l a t e d to those farms. 21 The working c o n d i t i o n s , occupations and purposes and ends of work w i t h i n those two economies presented c o n t r a s t i n g s e t t i n g s which a f f e c t e d the economic, s o c i a l and c u l t u r a l standards and behavior of the r e s p e c t i v e r e s i d e n t s and workers. But as the type of w o r k , i t s substance, d i r e c t i o n and performance, were determined by the economic and s o c i a l s e t t i n g s i n which work was conducted, so too were the r e s p e c t i v e s e t t i n g s shaped and sustained by the p a r t i c u l a r working h a b i t s and purposes of r e s i d e n t s . Work permeated the l i v e s of a l l i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts as an a c t i v i t y that conformed to the s p e c i a l s o c i a l q u a l i t i e s of the l o c a l community. Perhaps the greatest s t r e n g t h of Massachusetts s o c i e t y , as i t de a l t w i t h growth, change and time, was i t s t r a d i t i o n a l l o c a l i s m . The community was paramount i n s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n . At the base of th a t o r g a n i z a t i o n was a l o c a l economy which served to secure residence and permanence. The a g r i c u l t u r a l community provided a common labor and s o c i a l s e t t i n g f o r the m a j o r i t y of the po p u l a t i o n of Massachusetts. But i t was a h i g h l y l o c a l i z e d economy. R u r a l p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts was comprised of a s e r i e s of towns; a f a b r i c of contiguous l o c a l commun-i t i e s (Map 1). At the heart of each was the Meeting House-Church, the locus of the e c c l e s i a s t i c a l p o l i t y which at once caused these towns to e x i s t and served as a bi n d i n g agency which marked each of them as a s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l entity.\"'\"''\" The motive f o r c e behind the formation and continuance of these communities was an amalgam of r e l i g i o u s , s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l and economic imperatives. The choice of l o c a t i o n and the MAP 1 Towns of Massachusetts 1775 Source: Cappon, Ed., Atlas of Early America Bimimii rriilltjEJjl mm C : c f M n 3 i f V j j l j Jlrf , ' 22 or, t/s is — -n n — > l i s MM* £ 2 3 g. c O 41 determined the degree of a t t e n t i o n given to e i t h e r crop growing or l i v e s t o c k r e a r i n g . Another reason why t i l l a g e was more popular i n Hampshire than elsewhere was that household s i z e was l a r g e r than normal i n that county; an average of two a d u l t males per household meant that there was increased l a b o r a v a i l a b l e f o r the manual demands of crop r a i s i n g , which r e q u i r e d more labor than d i d l i v e s t o c k manage-ment (Table I ) . There were other p a r t i c u l a r v a r i a t i o n s : some men simply were b e t t e r farmers than were others. Nevertheless, b a s i c subsistence p r a c t i c e s were f a i r l y uniform throughout the province. The conformity i n land use and average holdings i s best i l l u s t r a t e d by the f a c t that the percentage of pro-v i n c i a l p o p u l a t i o n per county c l o s e l y matched each county's percentage of the p r o v i n c i a l c u l t i v a t e d acreage. Moreover, i t i s worth repeat-i n g t h a t the p r o v i n c i a l average of 24.7 acres of ara b l e land per house-hold was c l o s e to the averages w i t h i n each county — again excluding Dukes and Nantucket, and t h e i r combined 2.28% of the p r o v i n c i a l p o p u l a t i o n (Table I ) . These f i g u r e s and comparisons, more than any other data, i l l u s t r a t e the s c a l e and the u n i f o r m i t y of d i s t r i b u t i o n of subsistence farming throughout Massachusetts. By the beginning of the p r o v i n c i a l p eriod the e a r l i e r communal p r a c t i c e of common and open pasture and feed-grass f i e l d s had l a r g e l y disappeared from towns; the commons lands had been d i s t r i b u t e d to p r i v a t e use. In the eighteenth century, i n d i v i d u a l farmers d i v i d e d and. worked t h e i r p r o p e r t i e s according to t h e i r own needs and preferences. F i e l d systems were v a r i e d by r e g i o n and by i n d i v i d u a l p r a c t i c e . But 42 f o r the purposes of su b s i s t e n c e , most farmers ordered t h e i r f i e l d s w i t h a view to p r o v i d i n g b a s i c d i e t a r y m a t e r i a l s f o r t h e i r f a m i l i e s . Because the Massachusetts s o i l would not y i e l d a s u f f i c i e n t volume of a cash crop f o r export, t i l l e d f i e l d s were kept to a s i z e that could be managed 38 by a f a m i l y and provide f o r a l l or most of i t s household g r a i n s . The small t i l l a g e component — u s u a l l y two to four acres — of the f i e l d arrangements of most farmers meant that they could r e l o c a t e crop f i e l d s on t h e i r holdings without r e s o r t to crop r o t a t i o n methods of s o i l maintenance. This t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y p r i m i t i v e p r a c t i c e was t y p i c a l of a general absence of a g r i c u l t u r a l t e c h n i c a l i n n o v a t i o n among p r o v i n c i a l subsistence farmers; a p r a c t i c e that r e f l e c t e d some of the permanence of work patte r n s i n the r u r a l s e t t i n g . As Percy B i d w e l l notes: I n the century and a h a l f i n t e r v e n i n g between the settlement of New England and the opening of the nineteenth century, improvements of f a r - r e a c h i n g s i g n i f i c a n c e had been introduced i n E n g l i s h a g r i c u l t u r e . . . . [In Massachusetts] as soon as the pioneer stage had passed . . . the c o l o n i s t s s e t t l e d down i n a r o u t i n e husbandry. . . . There was no r e g u l a r l y observed succession of g r a i n crops . . . and the p r i n c i p a l c e r e a l s were a l t e r n a t e d on the l a r g e r f i e l d s , sharing the land w i t h small patches of o a t s , b a r l e y and f l a x . . . the land was u s u a l l y broken up a f t e r being i n grass 3 or 4 years, and then cropped f o r 3 years. 39 The mixed crop and l i v e s t o c k - r e a r i n g p r a c t i c e s of p r o v i n c i a l farmers r e f l e c t e d a mixed u t i l i t y of time, c l i m a t e , topography, economics and l a b o r . Crop t i l l a g e was the most time consuming work and r e q u i r e d the hardest p h y s i c a l l a b o r . I t was a l s o very s e n s i t i v e to the c a p r i c e s of weather and the l i m i t a t i o n s of s o i l type, and was f u r t h e r d i s c i p l i n e d by seasonal c l i m a t e . H U But i t was at the base of the farmer's personal economy. He needed g r a i n s f o r h i s household d i e t and any small surplus f o r s a l e or b a r t e r . Therefore, he balanced h i s land use w i t h c o n s i d e r a t i o n of maximum f e a s i b l e crop y i e l d upper-most i n h i s d e l i b e r a t i o n s . He devoted the smallest p r o p o r t i o n of h i s a r a b l e land and the bulk of h i s time and energy to crop r a i s i n g . L i v e s t o c k r a i s i n g r e q u i r e d more land and l e s s l a b o r than t i l l a g e , hence the farmer kept over 40% of h i s a r a b l e land i n pasture w i t h a f u r t h e r 35% i n grasses to provide winter hay feed f o r h i s handful of l i v e s t o c k . Nearly 20% was given over to g r a i n crops and the remaining 5% to orchard and vegetable gardens (Table I V ) . . The general r e s t r i c t i o n s on exten-s i v e t i l l a g e can be seen as manifest i n the p r o v i n c a l farm average of only 2.2 acres of e d i b l e crops. As a f u r t h e r means of a g r i c u l t u r a l economy and u t i l i t y the farmer u s u a l l y kept more sheep than c a t t l e , the former being e a s i e r to r a i s e and wool as important as l e a t h e r i n the l o c a l economies.^ Massachusetts produced corn, wheat, oats and rye as p r i n c i p a l crops — much corn a l s o went as feed f o r swine — w i t h wheat the most de s i r e d crop because of i t s food v a l u e . The province produced b a r l e y f o r brewing, f l a x f o r l i n e n f i b e r s and a l i t t l e hemp f o r commercial canvas production. Most of t h i s produce was consumed at home i n a v a r i e t y of ways. In eighteenth century Massachusetts crop y i e l d s ran from ten to f i f t e e n bushels per acre depending on g r a i n type, seed q u a l i t y , s o i l f e r t i l i t y , weather, personal i n d u s t r y and l u c k . Even 44 i f the small farmer was bold enough to attempt to plan t h i s e n t i r e crop i n wheat — a l o w e r - y i e l d i n g g r a i n than others i n the province — f o r t y to s i x t y bushels of ground wheat would b a r e l y supply the bread 42 needs of a household of s i x to eigh t persons. Each farmer attempted to grow as many types of c e r e a l g r a i n s as he could, i n order to avoid the r i s k of f a i l u r e — through bad weather, poor seed or b l i g h t — of an e n t i r e crop made up of a s i n g l e p a r t i c u l a r g r a i n . B a r l e y , corn, f l a x and hemp o c c a s i o n a l l y produced small marketable surpluses f o r the subsistance farmer, but o n l y s p o r a d i c a l l y . What wool, hides and ski n s he d i d not use at home provided another source of i r r e g u l a r farm s u r p l u s . He would have h i s f l o u r and meal ground at a l o c a l m i l l and o f t e n made h i s own c i d e r — i t being an e s s e n t i a l i n g r e d i e n t of the contemporary d i e t ; he k i l l e d , cured and packed h i s own l i v e s t o c k f o r meat. Many farmers had good stands of timber on the u n c u l t i v a t e d p o r t i o n s of t h e i r lands where s u p p l i e s of cordwood and some marketable 43 wood f o r l o c a l sawmills could be obtained. The farm home was as much part of the farm economy as were the f i e l d s , l i v e s t o c k and woodlots. In the home, the w i f e of the farmer, as w e l l as performing her customary domestic tasks of c h i l d r e a r i n g , baking, sewing, k n i t t i n g and so on, a l s o made soap and candles from the f a t s of animals butchered on the farm. She and her eld e r daughters spun l i n e n yarn from f l a x seeds grown, reaped, t r e a t e d and crushed by her husband and she spun some course wool f i b e r s from her husband's shearing. She made c l o t h e s , o f t e n from f a b r i c s woven elsewhere i n the community from yarns she had submitted The male c h i l d r e n of the household, when they were o l d and able enough, j o i n e d 45 t h e i r f a t h e r i n h i s work on the farm and elsewhere. Work was d i s t r i b u t e d and shared according to the i n d i v i d u a l f a m i l y members' c a p a c i t i e s , the farm's p a r t i c u l a r o r g a n i z a t i o n and the needs of the t o t a l f a m i l y . I n that way e n t i r e f a m i l i e s c o n t r i b u t e d as s i n g l e u n i t s to the domestic farm economy. The farm thus provided the common economic base f o r a f a m i l y ' s m a t e r i a l needs and the f a m i l y u n i t served as the p r a c t i c a l means of e x t r a c t i n g the maximum y i e l d from the i n d i v i d u a l farm. But the a g r i c u l t u r a l seasons i n Massachusetts were short and the amount of work r e q u i r e d to operate a ten-to twenty-acre mixed farm consumed perhaps h a l f the working year of an a d u l t male. Therefore, he sought other work away from h i s small farm. The i n d i v i d u a l i n the p r o v i n c i a l r u r a l town was not sequesterered i n 46 i s o l a t i o n on h i s own completely s e l f - c o n t a i n e d property. There i s no doubt that the subsistence f a m i l y farm was the dominant socio-economic mode of r u r a l p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y . But sub-s i s t e n c e was a l l t hat the f a m i l y farm could provide. The small farm was not a b s o l u t e l y capable of producing the t o t a l range of m a t e r i a l s used by a f a m i l y , j u s t as i t could not render t o t a l s o c i a l autonomy. For, as the f a m i l y needed the community f o r l e g a l , s o c i a l , moral and p o l i t i c a l l e a d e r s h i p and guidance, the heads of households r e q u i r e d the community f o r the m a t e r i a l and economic resources t h a t the sub-s i s t e n c e farm alone could not provide. In s h o r t , the p o l i c y and 46 p r a c t i c e of s e t t l i n g , o r g a n i z i n g and occupying r u r a l Massachusetts were drawn from e a r l i e r P u r i t a n p r i n c i p l e s that combined s o c i a l and moral values w i t h rudimentary m a t e r i a l s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y . Work and m o r a l i t y were l i n k e d and then based i n the socio-economic c r u c i b l e of the f a m i l y farm. The economic and i n t e l l e c t u a l values of the f a m i l y and the l a r g e r s o c i e t y were upheld w i t h i n t h i s and the b i n d i n g medium of the town. Without the a v a i l a b i l i t y of a cash crop, or the d e s i r e or opportunity f o r i n t e n s i v e n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l i n d u s t r y or manufacturing, the s o c i e t y of r u r a l Massachusetts arranged i t s e l f on thousands of small f a m i l y farms. These were i d e a l l y s u i t e d to the congregational and corporate values of the s o c i e t y . Without a commercial a g r i c u l t u r a l base the l a r g e l a b o r - i n t e n s i v e commercial farm o p e r a t i o n was imprac-t i c a l . The absence i n r u r a l towns, of a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n c e n t r a t i o n of commercial n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l i n d u s t r i a l e n t e r p r i s e , f u r t h e r l i m i t e d the economic a l t e r n a t i v e s of the r u r a l ..worker. I t was to the l a r g e r community of other small farmers that the i n d i v i d u a l subsistence farmer turned f o r added economic support, and f o r the s o c i a l expression and f u l f i l l m e n t he found i n the community's r e l i g i o u s and p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t i e s . Bound as he was to h i s farm by c u l t u r a l preference and economic n e c e s s i t y and p r a c t i c a l i t y , i t was i n the l o c a l and shared economy -of the town that the independent farmer completed h i s income and s e c u r i t y . I t was necessary t h e r e f o r e , that the farmer be more than a farmer. He was o b l i g e d to possess a s i n g l e or v a r i e t y of 47 a l t e r n a t i v e work t a l e n t s and the means to apply them. 47 There was a l s o need i n the communities of r u r a l Massachusetts f o r a permanent and v a r i e d range of non-farm labor s e r v i c e s . There was a mixture of the s u b s i d i a r y goods and la b o r requirements of a g r i -c u l t u r e , w i t h the assorted non-farming needs of any small pre-i n d u s t r i a l community. The subsistence farmer was s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t only to the l e v e l of h i s immediate a g r i c u l t u r a l means. His t a l e n t s , h i s f a m i l y and h i s farm provided a great d e a l of the b a s i c n e c e s s i t i e s of l i f e . But he a l s o r e q u i r e d b u i l d i n g s and b u i l d i n g m a t e r i a l s , farm and household implements, f i n i s h e d l e a t h e r goods, f u r n i t u r e , c l o t h i n g , footwear and a host of other manufactured items. No i n d i v i d u a l f a m i l y could hope to be a b s o l u t e l y capable of p r o v i d i n g f o r a l l i t s m a t e r i a l and s e r v i c e e s s e n t i a l s , and very few were capable of supporting t h e i r e n t i r e budgets from l a r g e - s c a l e farming. The community, as a place of supply and exchange of added goods and s e r v i c e s t h e r e f o r e became the source of the subsistence farmer's a d d i t i o n a l m a t e r i a l needs and the o u t l e t f o r h i s surplus time and l a b o r . To meet the d i v e r s e demands of the whole farm community, that surplus l a b o r o f t e n was r e f i n e d or expanded as a s k i l l i n one of the l o c a l non-farm t r a d e s , s e r v i c e s or c r a f t s . The s i n g l e most outstanding f e a t u r e of the l a b o r economy of r u r a l Massachusetts arose d i r e c t l y from those premises and r e s u l t e d i n the existence of a farmer who was a l s o p r o f i c i e n t and a c t i v e i n another work a c t i v i t y . This v o c a t i o n a l d u a l i t y created i n the r u r a l worker a simultaneous independence and dependence i n the context of l a b o r , f a m i l y , farm and community. 48 The a g r i c u l t u r a l town continued to accommodate t h i s p a t t e r n of work and personal farming. From forty-two i n number i n 1650, i n both Massachusetts Bay and Plymouth C o l o n i e s , they increased to e i g h t y -four i n 1700 and to 173 i n 1754; there were 192 towns i n the province 48 i n 1765 and 212 i n 1775. Spawned by the o l d e r settlements, these newer towns came i n t o being w i t h common p o l i t i c a l , s o c i a l , economic and a g r i c u l t u r a l mandates and arrangements. The elementary c o n f i g u r a -t i o n of Meeting House and i n d i v i d u a l farm l o t s was maintained. The m a j o r i t y of the new towns a f t e r 1700 arose from the spread of p o p u l a t i o n both east and west of the Connecticut R i v e r v a l l e y towns; there was a continuous b i f u r c a t i o n of e x i s t i n g towns i n the o r i g i n a l eastern c o u n t i e s . As populations i n some towns in c r e a s e d , as the average po p u l a t i o n f o r a l l towns rose, congestion was prevented by increased u t i l i z a t i o n of unused l a n d , by emigration and i n t e r n a l rearrangement. The h a b i t s of a g r i c u l t u r e and economic l i f e remained as they were. A f a m i l y could farm no more i n 1750 and produce no higher y i e l d s than i t d i d i n 1650. 4 9 Thus the new towns, l i k e the o l d , were a g r i c u l t u r a l communities and c o n s t i t u t e d l o c a l economies to the extent that the farm economy had to be supplied w i t h i t s n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l domestic s e r v i c e and l a b o r needs. And these communities, even when t h e i r p opulations reached and exceeded 1,100 were not l a r g e enough to support much labor s p e c i a l -i z a t i o n . Moreover, as a major reason f o r residency, farming remained an a c t i v i t y of v i r t u a l l y a l l a d u l t males and t h e i r f a m i l i e s . C e n t r a l -49 i z e d f a c i l i t i e s f o r the manufacture and supply of the many necessary non-farm commodities were not developed i n the small p r o v i n c i a l market. As Stuart Bruchey notes: \"No l a r g e s u p p l i e s of c a p i t a l or labor were seeking employment.\"\"^ The l o c a l communities managed to produce and manufacture t h e i r commodity requirements from the s k i l l s and surplus lab o r of t h e i r farm po p u l a t i o n s ; the production of non-a g r i c u l t u r a l commodities was conducted on a personal or very l i m i t e d s c a l e i n the l o c a l i z e d markets and economies of i n d i v i d u a l towns. The town i n r u r a l p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts had not subdivided i t s e l f i n t o s p e c i a l i z e d l a b o r s e c t o r s as had occurred i n the l a r g e r , commercial s e t t i n g of Boston where c e r t a i n workers were employed f o r the e n t i r e year i n a s i n g l e work a c t i v i t y . As there was not a segment of l a b o r devoted e x c l u s i v e l y to farming, n e i t h e r was there one committed wholly to c o n s t r u c t i o n , manufacturing, s e r v i c e or m a t e r i a l supply. The f a c t o r s that made v i r t u a l l y everyone a farmer a l s o created very few f u l l - t i m e farmers. Those same f a c t o r s a l s o shaped towns and regions i n t o a g r i c u l t u r a l communities of s t r i k i n g s i m i l a r i t i e s . In t h i s s e t t i n g , the work h a b i t s of subsistence farmers were tempered and enlarged by other s k i l l s and occupations and a l a b o r economy of f l u i d i t y , v e r s a t i l i t y and f l e x i b i l i t y ensued. 50 NOTES CHAPTER : I I \"^Bernard B a i l y n , New England Merchants i n the Seventeenth Century (New York: 1955) sets the tone f o r t h i s view of the Massachusetts economy at the s t a r t of the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d . See a l s o Michael Kammen, Empire and I n t e r e s t (New York: 1970), Chapter 3 and \" B i b l i o g r a p h i c a l Essay,\" pp. 158-164. 2 A.M. S c h l e s i n g e r , The C o l o n i a l Merchants and the American R e v o l u t i o n (New York: 1968), pp. 15-31; L.H. Gipson, The Coming of the Rev o l u t i o n (New York: 1954), pp. 10-84; Charles McL. Andrews, England's Commerical and C o l o n i a l P o l i c y (New Haven: 1938); C u r t i s N e t t e l s , \" B r i t i s h M e r c a n t i l i s m and the Economic Development of the T h i r t e e n C o l o n i e s , \" JEH 12 (1952), pp. 105-14. J.P. Greene, \"Search f o r I d e n t i t y : An I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the Meaning of Selected P a t t e r n s of S o c i a l Response i n 18th Century America,\" JSH 3 (1970), pp. 189-220; Greene, \" P o l i t i c a l Mimesis: A C o n s i d e r a t i o n of the H i s t o r i c a l and C u l t u r a l Roots of L e g i s l a t i v e Behavior i n the B r i t i s h Colonies i n the Eighteenth Century,\" AHR 75 (1969-70), pp. 337-68; John C l i v e and Bernard B a i l y n , \"England's C u l t u r a l P rovinces: Scotland and America,\" WMQ 11 (1954), pp. 200-13; Clarence Ver Steeg, The Formative Years, 1607-1763 (New York: 1964), pp. 173-202. 3 A l i c e Hanson Jones, \"Wealth Estimates f o r the New England Colonies about 1770,\" JEH 32 (1972), pp. 98-127. This a r t i c l e attempts to make sense of a complex problem and succeeds i n p r o v i d i n g some new insights,? even though i t s methods are flawed. 4 Appendix I I . ^\"Economic mode\" i s given to mean that a c t i v i t y which produced m a t e r i a l support or l i v e l i h o o d . Jones, \"Wealth Estimates,\" p. 124, notes that j u s t over 70% of a l l measured wealth i n 1770 i n Massachusetts was i n la n d . ^Jackson Turner Main, The S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e of Rev o l u t i o n a r y America ( P r i n c e t o n : 1965), Chapter 1, esp. p. 18; Kenneth L o c k r i d g e , \"Land, P o p u l a t i o n and the E v o l u t i o n of New England S o c i e t y ; and An Afterth o u g h t \" i n S. Katz, ed,, C o l o n i a l America (Boston: 1971), pp. 466-91. 51 Q Appendix I I I ; M. Arch. MSS V o l . 130, \" V a l u a t i o n s of Towns.\" 9 I b i d . ; Baker MSS, \"V.S. C l a r k Notes,\" Box 2. C l a r k estimates the number of commercial fishermen i n Massachusetts i n 1720 at 1,100. \"^W.I. Davisson and D.J. Duggan, \"Commerce i n 17th Century Essex County,\" EIHC 107 (1971), pp. 113-43; E.R. Johnson, et a l . , H i s t o r y of Domestic and Foreign Commerce (Washington: 1915), V o l . I . \"'\"\"'\"Michael Zuckerman, Peaceable Kingdoms: New England Towns i n the Eighteenth Century (New York: 1970); Kenneth Lockridge and Alan K r e i d e r , \"The E v o l u t i o n of Massachusetts Town Government, 1640-1740,\" WMQ 23 (1966), pp. 549-74; Anne Bush MacLear, E a r l y New England Towns: A Comparative Study of Their Development (New York: 1908). 12 Sumner C h i l t o n P o w e l l , P u r i t a n V i l l a g e : The Formation of a New England Town (Westleyan: 1963), pp. 178-86. 13 Mass. Bay Recs. V o l . I , pp. 18, 116-121, 160, 353. The major ac t s concerning the,.purposes of town settlement, government, a u t h o r i t y and purpose can be found i n summary i n W i l l i a m Whitmore, compiler, C o l o n i a l Laws, pp. 11, 147-9. See a l s o Page Smith, As a C i t y Upon a H i l l : The Town i n American H i s t o r y (New York: 1966), pp. 8-10. 14 On the p h y s i c a l alignment of town farms and residences see P o w e l l , P u r i t a n V i l l a g e and MacLear, E a r l y New England Towns. On markets, manufacturing and farming see: V.S. C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufactures i n the United S t a t e s , 1607-1860 (Washington: 1916), pp. 87-122; P.W. B i d w e l l and John Falconer, H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e i n the Northern United S t a t e s , 1620-1860 (Washington: 1925), pp. 59, 119-120, 131; Richard H o f s t a d t e r , America, 1750: A S o c i a l P o r t r a i t (New York: 1973) , pp. 142-151. \" ^ B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 84-101, 136; D a r r e t t B. Rutman, \"Gov. Winthrop's Garden Crop: The S i g n i f i c a n c e of A g r i c u l t u r e i n the E a r l y Commerce of Mass. Bay,\" WMQ 20 (1963), pp. 396-415; Robert R. Walcott, \"Husbandry i n C o l o n i a l New England,\" NEQ 9 (1936), pp. 218-52. M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 1, \" A g r i c u l t u r e , \" passim. \" ^ C o l l e c t i o n s of the Old Colony S o c i e t y , No. 3, pp. 131-62 (Taunton, Mass.: 1885); C l a r k , H i s t , of Manufactures, pp. 54, 76, 138; Mass. Bay Recs., V o l . I I , pp. 61, 81, 103, 105; Baker, MSS, Lynn Iron Works F o l d e r , \" T y p e s c r i p t s of O r i g i n a l Documents.\" 52 17W.R. B a g n a l l , The T e x t i l e I n d u s t r i e s of the United States (Cambridge, Mass.: 1893), pp. 1-27. 1 8 M. Arch. MSS., V o l . 59, pp. 355-7, 376-7 and passim f o r a l l r u r a l manufacturing e n t e r p r i s e s ; Acts and Resolves, V o l . 3, pp. 1053-4 dis c u s s e s the problems i n l o c a t i n g monopoly businesses i n r u r a l communities. 1 9 C l a r k , H i s t , of Manufactures, pp. 9-30, 87-122; B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , p. 131. 20 For ore, c o a l , and other mineral de p o s i t s and f o r m i l l s and f o r g e s , see L e s t e r J . Cappon, e d i t o r , A t l a s of E a r l y American H i s t o r y : The Revolutionary Era, 1760-90 ( P r i n c e t o n : 1976). A l s o , see C u r t i s s N e t t e l s , \"The Menace of C o l o n i a l Manufacturing,\" NEQ 4 (1931), pp. 230-69; C l a r k , H i s t , of Manufactures, pp. 73-86, 159-161; Main, S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e , pp. 21, 23, 27, 31-32. 21 H i s t o r i c a l Data R e l a t i n g to Counties, C i t i e s and Towns i n Massachusetts (Boston: 1975), passim; P o w e l l , P u r i t a n V i l l a g e . 22 L o i s K. Mathews, The Expansion of New England (Boston: 1909), pp. 90 f f ; Robert Gross, The Minutemen and Their World (New York: 1976), pp. 68-108. 23 Edmund Morgan, The P u r i t a n Family (New York: 1944). 24 Zuckerman, Peaceable Kingdoms. 25 Main, S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e , p. 27; B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 126-131. 2 6 MacLear, E a r l y New England Towns, p. 181. Zuckerman, Peaceable Kingdoms; Gross, Minutemen, pp. 11-16. 27 Main, S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e , pp. 7-42; MHS MSS \"Roxbury V a l u -a t i o n , 1727,\" i n a d e t a i l e d breakdown of t h i s assessment i t was found that 92.6% of the p o p u l a t i o n l i v e d on p l o t s of 1 to 108 acres of c u l t i v a t e d l a n d . Of 273 rated p o l l s , only 42 farmed l e s s than 10 acres of c u l t i v a t e d l a n d . The average f o r the 241 who occupied more than 10 acres was 2.7 acres of combined t i l l a g e , pasture, orchard and c u l t i v a t e d grass. The Roxbury f i g u r e s were s l i g h t l y higher than the p r o v i n c i a l average. For town populations see M. Arch. MSS, V o l s . 130-134, \" V a l u a t i o n of Towns,\" passim. These documents a l s o c o n t a i n data on land use, farm s i z e , value and y i e l d s . See Appendix IV,and Table I I . 53 28 . . . . . H x s t o r i c a l Data. 29 MHS.MSS, \"Valuations of Counties, 1751,\" i n Miscellaneous Bound Manuscripts (see Appendix IV, t h i s paper). Ibxd. 31 I b i d . , H i s t o r i c a l Data. 3 2M. Arch.MSS., V o l . 130, \"Va l u a t i o n s of Towns.\" The number of persons per r a t e a b l e p o l l can be given as 4.67 based on known gross p o p u l a t i o n f i g u r e s f o r the province and separate assessments of p o l l s . See MHS.MSS. \"Valuations of Counties, 1751\" and Appendix I I I , and IV. 33 Approximately 59% of t i t l e d land i n 1767 was not being used f o r a g r i c u l t u r e ; M. Arch. MSS., V o l s . 130-134, \"Valuations of Towns.\" For l a t e r f i g u r e s see B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , p. 119. pp. 7-42. 34MHS.MSS., \"Roxbury V a l u a t i o n s \" ; J.T. Main, S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e , 35 Walcott, \"Husbandry\"; B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 33-39, 94 f f . 3 6 M e r i l l Jensen, \"The American R e v o l u t i o n and American A g r i -c u l t u r e , \" A g r i c . H i s t o r y 43 (1969), pp. 107-125; Walcott, \"Husbandry\"; B i d w e l l , H i s t , of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 115-116; Kenneth L o c k r i d g e , A New England Town: The F i r s t Hundred Years (New York: 1970); Lockridge, \"Land, P o p u l a t i o n . \" There i s widespread disagreement on how much average land was held by p r o p r i e t o r s a f t e r 1750. C e r t a i n l y i t was of greater q u a n t i t y i n the west than i n the older eastern r e g i o n s . The M. Arch., \"Valuations of Towns\" 'give more in f o r m a t i o n on farmed land than on t o t a l land possessed by i n d i v i d u a l s but a f i g u r e c l o s e to 100 acres seems to be the p r o v i n c i a l norm. The problem of f i x i n g p r e c i s e f i g u r e s f o r r e g i o n s , towns and i n d i v i d u a l s i s compounded by the f a c t that not a l l land was deeded and recorded i n t r a n s a c t i o n , e s p e c i a l l y between f a t h e r s and sons, and much land was leased and sub-leased under a v a r i e t y of forms and methods. 54 37 B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , Chapter 9, esp. pp. 119-20, 131; Jensen, \"American A g r i c u l t u r e , \" p. 124; Matthews, Expansion, p. 90 f f ; Walcott, \"Husbandry.\" 38 On s o i l s and y i e l d s , see B.T. Bunting, The Geography of S o i l (Chicago: 1965); Jensen, \"American A g r i c u l t u r e , \" pp. 110-125; Walcott, \"Husbandry.\" 39 B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 84, 86. 84 f f . 4 0 W a l c o t t , \"Husbandry\"; B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , p. 41 MHS.MSS, \"Roxbury V a l u a t i o n s \" ; Appendix IV. On crop y i e l d s see M. Arch. MSS., V o l . I , \" A g r i c u l t u r e , \" passim; B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 89-93. On bread d i e t , types, and the l a r g e amounts consumed, see MHS. Misc. Bound MSS, \"Alms House Expenses,\" Mar. 1, 1760; C a r l Bridenbaugh, \"The High Cost of L i v i n g i n Boston, 1728,\" NEQ 5 (1932), pp. 800-11; Acts and Resolves, V o l . 7, App. 2, pp. 567 f f . The \" M i l i t a r y , \" Volumes (67-80), i n M. Arch. MSS co n t a i n i n f o r m a t i o n on bread consumption. 43 M. Arch. MSS, V o l . I , \" A g r i c u l t u r e , \" passim. 44 A l i c e Morse E a r l e , Home L i f e i n C o l o n i a l Days (Stockbridge, Mass.: 1974), (1989), Chapters' 1, 8, 9, 11. 45 Walcott, \"Husbandry.\" 46 This p o i n t has been much debated. I t has been argued that i n d i v i d u a l i s m and i s o l a t i o n increased as town common lands were broken up f o r p r i v a t e ownership and that e a r l i e r \"corporatism\" d e c l i n e d as a r e s u l t of t h i s process. See Richard Dunn, \"The S o c i a l H i s t o r y of E a r l y New England,\" AQ 24-5 (1972), pp. 661-679. 47 B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , p. 131. 48 H i s t o r i c a l Data, f o r the r i s e i n average populations of towns see Appendix I I I , i . Walcott, \"Husbandry\"; B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 5-146; Anonymous, Some Observations R e l a t i n g to Massachusetts Bay (Boston: 1750), p. 22. Stuart Bruchey, The Roots of American Economic Growth, 1607-1861 (New York: 1965), p. 71. CHAPTER I I I THE RURAL ARTISAN In h i s d i s c u s s i o n of r u r a l f a m i l i e s , subsistence farming and dual occupational s t a t u s , James Henretta observed that these i n s t i t u t i o n s and p r a c t i c e s were: not only the r e s u l t of geographical or economic f a c t o r s . These men and women were enmeshed a l s o i n a web of s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s and c u l t u r a l expectations that i n h i b i t e d the f r e e - p l a y of market f o r c e s . Much of the output of t h e i r farms was consumed by [ l o c a l ] r e s i d e n t s , most of whom . . . were not paid wages f o r t h e i r l a b o r . 1 Among the p r i n c i p a l f a c t o r s which determined the nature of work i n the towns of r u r a l Massachusetts were the strong i n f l u e n c e s of subsistence farming, the dual-occupation character of work and the m a t e r i a l s e l f -s u f f i c i e n c y of l o c a l economies. Work a l s o i n v o l v e d the i n d i v i d u a l i n a balance of independence and interdependence i n h i s r e l a t i o n s w i t h the community. The use of b a r t e r , r a t h e r than cash wages, was an a d d i t i o n a l i n f l u e n c e on the personal r e l a t i o n s h i p s between r e s i d e n t s . The a g r i c u l t u r a l town was the dominant s o c i a l s e t t i n g f o r work i n the province. In order to gain a b e t t e r understanding of the r e l a t i o n s h i p of work to community, i t w i l l be necessary to examine the major kinds of work which were performed l o c a l l y . A c l o s e d e s c r i p t i o n of how work merged w i t h the needs of the community, and 56 57 by whom and under what c o n d i t i o n s i t was performed, w i l l show the strong i n f l u e n c e of work patterns on the s o c i a l character and s t a b i l i t y of the community i n Massachusetts. As the ends of work were d i r e c t e d toward the maintenance of the subsistence farm, the exact forms of work were r e f l e c t e d i n the demands and l i m i t a t i o n s of extensive a g r i c u l t u r e . The supremacy of the f a m i l y farm, as a d e s i r e d and fundamental s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n , was combined w i t h l o c a l patterns of work to f o s t e r common c o n d i t i o n s , i n t e r e s t s and aims. These shared q u a l i t i e s u nderlined the d u r a b i l i t y of the s o c i e t y ' s i n s t i t u t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e . The records show that from the end of the seventeenth to the middle of the eighteenth c e n t u r i e s , more than one hundred d i f f e r e n t o c c u p a t i o n a l c a t e g o r i e s e x i s t e d i n r u r a l Massachusetts. Not a l l of these were found i n any one community at a l l times; the usual number i n any town was about t h i r t y . Apart from \" l a b o r e r s \" and \"husbandmen,\" these v o c a t i o n a l t i t l e s i n v a r i a b l y r e f e r r e d to a r t i s a n s , that i s to s k i l l e d , t r a i n e d craftsmen. Nearly h a l f of the r u r a l male p o p u l a t i o n claimed c r a f t s c r e d e n t i a l s , and of the many trades and s k i l l e d occupa-t i o n s which served the a g r i c u l t u r a l community as a n c i l l a r i e s to the farming and domestic economies, four stood out as being predominant. These were b l a c k s m i t h i n g , carpentry, shoemaking and l e a t h e r working, and w e a v i n g - t a i l o r i n g . Of these the blacksmith was the most v i t a l to farming i n non-mechanized a g r i c u l t u r a l s o c i e t y . The carpenter, 58 shoemaker and t e x t i l e - c l o t h e s m a k e r provided the b a s i c necessary ad-j u n c t s to domestic l i f e . Of the hundred or more oc c u p a t i o n a l d i v i s i o n s , only a few were not d i r e c t l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the four p r i n c i p a l a r t i s a n c a t e g o r i e s . ^ Most were r e l a t e d as e i t h e r m a t e r i a l s u p p l i e r s to the main occupations such as sawyers, forge-operators, tanners or f u l l e r s or were a r t i s a n s who l i s t e d a s u b - s p e c i a l t y as a mark of s p e c i a l e x p e r t i s e . For example, a man who was a general b l a c k s m i t h might p r e f e r to be known as a \" l o c k s m i t h \" because he was perhaps the only s p e c i a l i z e d l o c k s m i t h i n the r e g i o n ; most of h i s blacksmith work would be of a more conventional shop v a r i e t y , but even i f he d i d l o c k s m i t h work only r a r e l y , he might nevertheless come to be r e f e r r e d to as a l o c k s m i t h and not a blacksmith. S i m i l a r l y , a l e a t h e r worker, although he might produce everything from simple tanned hides to saddles, harnesses and even l e a t h e r coats and breeches, might be designated a \"harness maker\" because he happened to make the best l o c a l harnesses and not because he spent a m a j o r i t y of h i s time i n that p a r t i c u l a r a c t i v i t y . And so i t was w i t h carpenters v i s - a - v i s s h i n g l i n g , p l a s t e r i n g , f l o o r i n g or stairmaking; the s p e c i a l t y noted d i d not s i g n i f y a p r i n c i p a l o c c u p a t i o n a l a c t i v i t y but r a t h e r a s p e c i a l or o c c a s i o n a l e x p e r t i s e . In s h o r t , the great many occupa-t i o n a l t i t l e s , when examined, can be reduced to a narrower range of general c r a f t s . A r u r a l carpenter or b l a c k s m i t h understood and p r a c t i c e d the complete range of s k i l l s i n v o l v e d i n h i s trade. The r u r a l community d i d have need of s p e c i a l t y goods, s e r v i c e s and work but the l o c a l economy was too small to support many workers i n f u l l -time labo r s p e c i a l i z a t i o n . The p r i n c i p a l trades were p r a c t i c e d by men who performed the most comprehensive range of t a s k s , i n c l u d i n g 3 o c c a s i o n a l s p e c i a l t i e s . The r u r a l a r t i s a n was v e r s a t i l e i n the conduct of h i s c r a f t ; he was v e r s a t i l e a l s o s i n c e he maintained a 4 p r o p r i e t a r y and v o c a t i o n a l attachment to the land. I t was that attachment to the land that determined the s o c i a l and economic p r i o r i t i e s of the r u r a l a r t i s a n ' s l i f e . I t served as the s t a r t i n g p o i n t f o r h i s experience, as the legacy f o r h i s progeny, and i t f l a v o r e d the conduct of h i s working l i f e . Yet w h i l e the farm was the c e n t r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n h i s economy the r u r a l a r t i s a n a l s o p r a c t i c e d h i s c r a f t and r e l i e d on i t and used i t to e s t a b l i s h h i s place i n the community. The r u r a l a r t i s a n was normally the son of a f a r m e r - a r t i s a n . He was r a i s e d on a subsistence farm as part of the t r a d i t i o n a l farm f a m i l y u n i t , r e c e i v i n g a rudimentary s c h o l a s t i c education and t a k i n g part i n farm work, as an a i d to h i s f a t h e r , when he was e i g h t or nine years o l d . From that point i n h i s l i f e , u n t i l he was fourteen to s i x t e e n years o l d , the son of the a r t i s a n -farmer was included as part of the complete economic f u n c t i o n of the f a m i l y . At some point i n h i s mid-teens, the boy would be apprenticed to l e a r n a t r a d e . I n keeping w i t h Massachusetts custom, a p r a c t i c e encouraged by law and based on E n g l i s h precedent, the youth would l e a r n a s k i l l away from the home and h i s f a t h e r ' s d i r e c t t u t e l a g e , w h i l e h i s f a t h e r , i f he r e q u i r e d or d e s i r e d an apprentice of h i s own 60 would seek one from outside the immediate f a m i l y . This method of c r a f t s t r a i n i n g was predicated upon a p r i n c i p l e of combining trades acumen w i t h s o c i a l exposure. By removing the apprentice from the i n s t r u c t i o n of the f a t h e r i t was hoped that c r a f t s t r a i n i n g would be more d i s c i p l i n e d , o b j e c t i v e and r i g o r o u s than i t would be at home; by p l a c i n g the youth w i t h another a r t i s a n and h i s f a m i l y , i t was expected that the young man would encounter wider communal standards of s o c i a b i l i t y , h u m i l i t y and r e s p e c t a b i l i t y . Thus the young a r t i s a n entered independent adulthood i n possession of a sense of personal and community r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and a s k i l l learned at the hands of a n e u t r a l teacher. These a t t r i b u t e s would support him w h i l e he r e f i n e d h i s work s k i l l s , and u n t i l he e i t h e r i n h e r i t e d land or saved enough to purchase, rent or le a s e a c u l t i v a t e d p l o t or prop e r t y . t h a t could be c u l t i v a t e d . Sometimes, when land was not a v a i l a b l e , or when there was i n s u f f i c i e n t work f o r the young journeyman to set up an independent household, the a r t i s a n would r e t u r n home, to help on h i s f a t h e r ' s land and p r a c t i c e h i s c r a f t i n the community as he was needed. I n time, the young man would u s u a l l y succeed i n e s t a b l i s h i n g himself i n h i s own house, on land that he i n h e r i t e d , bought or l e a s e d , w h i l e he continued to gain experience i n h i s c r a f t and expand h i s working time and income. W h i l e . i t . i s c e r t a i n that not a l l Massachusetts r u r a l a r t i s a n s followed that p a r t i c u l a r p a t t e r n , a m a j o r i t y d i d . Though many sons d i d f o l l o w t h e i r f a t h e r s ' t r a d e s , not a l l boys 61 were a u t o m a t i c a l l y apprenticed to t h e i r f a t h e r ' s c r a f t s . Other c o n s i d e r a t i o n s f o r the trade to be learned were the a v a i l a b i l i t y of a p p r e n t i c e s h i p s i n the community or nearby and the f a t h e r ' s means — f o r there was u s u a l l y a cost i n c u r r e d by the parents. The boy's s p e c i a l v o c a t i o n a l i n c l i n a t i o n s or t a l e n t s were a l s o considered. I t can be assumed,on the b a s i s of Robert Seybolt's samples, that at l e a s t h a l f of the sons of r u r a l a r t i s a n s who were apprenticed, followed trades other than those of t h e i r f a t h e r s ; and more than h a l f began farming t h e i r own p r o p e r t i e s soon a f t e r completion of t h e i r appren-t i c e s h i p s . 7 By h i s mid-to l a t e - t w e n t i e s , the young a r t i s a n would be married and would have begun a f a m i l y . E v e n t u a l l y he would have anywhere from two to s i x or more c h i l d r e n who survived i n f a n c y ; the higher number of s u r v i v i n g c h i l d r e n normally r e f l e c t e d an i n d i v i d u a l ' s sound economic s t a t u s or prospects. With h i s f a m i l y , h i s few c u l t i v a t e d acres and h i s c r a f t s s k i l l , the r u r a l a r t i s a n was now at the head of g a l a b o r and economic u n i t w i t h i n the a g r i c u l t u r a l community. I f the a r t i s a n ' s f a t h e r had been s u c c e s s f u l i n h o l d i n g or amassing a l a r g e contiguous acreage f o r the purpose of s e t t l i n g h i s grown sons then the young a r t i s a n would r e s i d e i n c l o s e p r o x i m i t y to h i s f a t h e r . But u s u a l l y the land obtained by the son was i n another p a r t of the town or even i n another community. The process of land accumulation and d i s p o s a l among r u r a l a r t i s a n s was v a r i e d and complex. Sometimes an eighteenth century son took possession of land that remained from 62 hundred—year-old grants that had not been exhausted by previous p a r t -i b l e d i s p o s a l . I t should be remembered that 100 acres of land would provide \"home l o t s \" f o r s e v e r a l subsistence farms. In other ways, f a t h e r s attempted to ensure i n h e r i t a b l e land by buying or l e a s i n g , over time, small q u a n t i t i e s of land elsewhere i n the town or i n other towns and even i n d i s t a n t regions of the province. But land u s u a l l y was a v a i l a b l e to the young r u r a l a r t i s a n ; p a r t s of f i f t y -acre h o l d i n g s , of which only h a l f had been c u l t i v a t e d , were s t i l l being leased to be cl e a r e d and planted i n the 1760s i n the o l d e s t q s e t t l e d s e c t i o n s of Massachusetts. As the b a s i s f o r the f a m i l y economy, the farm provided d o m i c i l e , subsistence, p r i v a c y and a foundation f o r economic s t a b i l i t y . The a r t i s a n ' s c r a f t work d i r e c t l y and i n d i r e c t l y s u p plied the means of working the farm and of a c q u i r i n g any n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l requirements he d i d not produce f o r h i m s e l f . At an e a r l y date the young a r t i s a n -farmer would f i n d i t necessary to \" h i r e \" a man and o f t e n that man's \"boys\" — e i t h e r sons or apprentices — to work h i s land f o r him w h i l e he r e p a i d t h i s debt by performing s k i l l e d work. But l a t e r , as h i s own sons grew and h i s economic c o n d i t i o n improved, he would reverse t h i s p r a c t i c e and could send h i s sons, horses and oxen to work the land of others. Meanwhile, w i t h a young and growing f a m i l y the a r t i s a n -farmer was kept f u l l y occupied by farm and c r a f t . He balanced h i s f i n a n c i a l accounts w i t h an i n f o r m a l method of l a b o r exchange and b a r t e r . He re c e i v e d help on h i s small farm, work m a t e r i a l s f o r h i s trade and domestic commodities i n exchange f o r h i s own work and f o r goods or s e r v i c e s produced by h i s c r a f t . Of course he d i d as much as p o s s i b l e of h i s own farm work but i n very busy p e r i o d s , even on small acreages, help was o f t e n needed.\"*\"^ R e c i p r o c a l farm work was not simply a matter of neighbor \" h e l p i n g \" neighbor. These exchanges of la b o r were based upon a monetary value or i t s equivalent i n s e r v i c e , commodity or l a b o r . The value of the exchange was t i e d to a previous s e r v i c e performed by one of the p a r t i e s and r e t i r e d by the other; or the l a b o r would be recorded, to be c r e d i t e d l a t e r by some other exchange of la b o r or goods Few a r t i s a n s suspended t h e i r c r a f t s work e n t i r e l y during the busy \"growing season.\" I t was reduced, of course, to a l l o w f o r the very s t r i c t demands of tending to crops. But the work of the b l a c k s m i t h , carpenter, shoemaker, t a i l o r and weaver continued. In t h i s way, the a r t i s a n - f a r m e r was e s p e c i a l l y dependent upon other l o c a l workers to a i d him i n necessary farm work, j u s t as he continued to r e q u i r e the goods and s e r v i c e s provided by other a r t i s a n s and as the community required h i s s e r v i c e s and c r a f t i n a l l seasons. Thus, the a r t i s a n -farmer was e a r l y e s t a b l i s h e d as h i s own master, possessing a market-able s k i l l along w i t h the farm property that served to secure h i s b a s i c d i e t a r y and household needs. That measure of independence could only be sustained by a c l o s e l a b o r and economic r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the r e s t of the l o c a l community. In that way the a r t i s a n -farmer was at once an independent worker whose fortunes were i n t e r -dependent w i t h a l a r g e r l a b o r economy. Furthermore, w i t h a minimum of money or hard currency being c i r c u l a t e d , the f l e x i b l e b a r t e r method of payment con s o l i d a t e d the i n d i v i d u a l ' s contact w i t h and involvement i n the shared economic a f f a i r s of the town and i t s r e s i d e n t s . ' ^ W i t h i n t h i s system the r u r a l b l a cksmith was the man mainly r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the m a t e r i a l work needs of farmers. He shoed horses of course, but he made and r e p a i r e d plows, hoes, scythes and other a g r i c u l t u r a l implements. For the home he r e p a i r e d metal pots, p a i l s and k e t t l e s , made door hinges, axe heads and other domestic metal products. In most towns of 200 to 300 f a m i l i e s , there would be f i v e or s i x b l a c k s m i t h s , and w h i l e some d i d s t r e s s c e r t a i n aspects of metalwork, most were in v o l v e d i n a combination of f a r r i e r work, farm t o o l and hardware r e p a i r and production. T y p i c a l l y , a l o c a l b l a c k -smith d i d business w i t h between t h i r t y and f i f t y separate people i n any year, performing s e r v i c e s ranging from a few minutes sharpening a scythe to s e v e r a l weeks making a plow. He would have as many as t h i r t y outstanding accounts at any time. This meant that h i s b l a c k s m i t h i n g work was c o n s t a n t l y being balanced f o r or against goods and l a b o r and s e r v i c e s provided f o r him. For at l e a s t f o u r months between l a t e autumn and the f o l l o w i n g sowing season, he would work f u l l time at h i s c r a f t f o r up to twelve hours a day, s i x days a week. At the height of the haying or harvest season, he might reduce h i s shop work to one or two days a week. The s t r i k i n g f e a t u r e of the young blacksmith's work h a b i t s i s the degree of hard, constant work invo l v e d i n b a l a n c i n g the demands of the farm w i t h the necessary 65 c r a f t s work. This regimen was e s p e c i a l l y t a x i n g during the f i r s t few years of farming and marriage. Then, the b l a c k s m i t h , as other young a r t i s a n - f a r m e r s , was almost s o l e l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r h i s f a m i l y ' s income. But i n time h i s e l d e s t son would be supplementing the f a m i l y income by doing o c c a s i o n a l farm work on h i s f a t h e r ' s b e h a l f , away from home and earning about h a l f the usual farm l a b o r e r s r a t e of pay. A l s o , at that stage, t h i s son could do more work on the home farm, i n summer and w i n t e r , f r e e i n g h i s f a t h e r from some expense and a l l o w i n g him to perform more shop w o r k . ^ The l i f e of N a t h a n i e l Chamberlin, a Plymouth county b l a c k s m i t h , followed that general p a t t e r n . He was born i n 1722, and i n 1743 he f i n i s h e d h i s a p p r e n t i c e s h i p , s t a r t e d h i s own shop, began farming f i f t e e n i n h e r i t e d acres and married, a l l w i t h i n a few months. Of h i s c h i l d r e n born between 1745 and 1764, eigh t survived i n f a n c y , four each of boys and g i r l s . The bulk of Chamberlin's e a r l y expenditure was f o r h i r i n g men and animals f o r h i s farm work. Throughout h i s working l i f e , Chamberlin received help on h i s farm, i r o n s u p p l i e s and v a r i o u s i n d u s t r i a l and domestic commodities i n exchange f o r h i s bla c k s m i t h i n g . N a t u r a l l y he d i d as much of h i s own farm work as he could but, i n season, he o f t e n needed a s s i s t a n c e ; he paid f o r that a i d w i t h shop work. Over the course of twenty years, h i s accounts were balanced mostly by exchanges of goods and s e r v i c e s and not by money payments. H i s scope was such that at v a r i o u s times Chamberlin had as many as f o r t y accounts which were c u r r e n t ; and the v a r i e t i e s of other trades — v i r t u a l l y a l l i n the community — bestowed on 66 him a great d e a l of m a n o e u v e r a b i l i t y i n h i s b a r t e r i n g . During the 1740s and 1750s, Chamberlin's labor represented the f a m i l y ' s s o l e source of income. But by 1755 h i s e l d e s t son, then ten years o l d , was c o n t r i b u t i n g to the f a m i l y budget, as Chamberlin debited a c l i e n t , \" f o r my boy and mare to plow.\" As the f a m i l y matured i t s l a b o r p a t t e r n s changed. With fewer young c h i l d r e n r e q u i r i n g her a t t e n t i o n and energies the blacksmith's w i f e could begin carding and spinning more f l a x and wool both f o r her own f a m i l y ' s c l o t h i n g and t e x t i l e needs and on contract to other f a m i l i e s and to l o c a l weavers. With more f a m i l y members t a k i n g part i n the economy of the home, the f a m i l y economic u n i t became more f l e x i b l e and e f f i c i e n t . For example, a blacksmith w i t h a w i f e , e i g h t c h i l d r e n and a r e s i d e n t a p p r e n t i c e , could supply h i s e n t i r e household w i t h shoes f o r a year by p r o v i d i n g a l o c a l shoemaker w i t h about two weeks of assorted b l a c k s m i t h work and by having h i s w i f e and adolescent daughters s p i n a q u a n t i t y of l i n e n yarn from the l a t t e r ' s own f l a x . The blacksmith's o l d e s t son could complete the f a m i l y ' s combined c o n t r i b u t i o n and round o f f the value of the shoes, by working a few days i n the shoemaker's hay meadow. In t h i s way the maturing f a m i l y combined to supplement the t o t a l income of the blacksmith's economy w h i l e he continued to do farm work, f o r himself and f o r others; and pursued h i s trade and sometimes performed other work f o r c r e d i t o r s who might have no need f o r b l a c k -13 smithing but who demanded h i s labor f o r other t a s k s . The mutual exchange of work and goods b a r t e r meant that the bla c k s m i t h , when he needed help or m a t e r i a l s or commodities, would commit himself to repaying as he could. He would attempt to do t h i s by means of h i s c r a f t but o f t e n a c r e d i t o r would r e q u i r e farm l a b o r or other forms of work and s e r v i c e and the blacksmith would r e t i r e the debt w i t h v a r i o u s forms of h i s or h i s f a m i l y ' s l a b o r . The reverse was true too, of course. Often, the blacksmith d i d not r e q u i r e shoes, or woven c l o t h or the s e r v i c e s of a t a i l o r f o r whom he had done work and would have the other man, or h i s f a m i l y , repay the o b l i g a t i o n w i t h farm l a b o r or other forms of work. Hence, i n these matters of b a r t e r and r e c i p r o c i t y the kinds of work, goods and s e r v i c e s exchanged depended upon the needs and c a p a c i t i e s of both p a r t i e s . The r u r a l a r t i s a n , by being both craftsman and farmer, was and had to be very f l e x i b l e w i t h h i s work a b i l i t i e s . His personal v e r s a t i l i t y enlarged the t o t a l l a b o r f l e x i b i l i t y of the complete f a m i l y u n i t . As a s i n g l e economic u n i t i n the context of a h i g h l y p a r o c h i a l l o c a l economy, the f a m i l y had l i t t l e need f o r cash. The a r t i s a n - f a r m e r could manipulate h i s own and h i s f a m i l y ' s l a b o r and balance i t against t h e i r combined needs.'''4 In the f i r s t h a l f of the eighteenth century, a r u r a l b l a c k s m i t h i n Massachusetts, w i t h a busy trade and a farm of approximately f i f t e e n acres of land would have a combined income roughly equal to that of the f u l l - t i m e wage earning Boston a r t i s a n . But he would r e c e i v e l e s s than o n e - f i f t h of that income i n cash. I f he was e f f i c i e n t and hard working, the r u r a l blacksmith's expenditures would be s l i g h t l y l e s s than h i s assessed income. Even i f l i t t l e money was exchanged i n t h i s economy, a l l work and goods, no matter how they were r e p a i d , were given monetary values and incomes and expenditures were always evaluated i n terms of the equivalent p r i c e s and wages of bartered items, s e r v i c e s and l a b o r . In some i n d i v i d u a l cases, and i n some years f o r a l l r u r a l a r t i s a n s , income equivalent would f a l l below that of the f u l l - t i m e Boston a r t i s a n . But the annual budget of the r u r a l a r t i s a n d i d not in c l u d e many d i e t a r y and domestic items. The farm generated most of the f a m i l y ' s food requirements and much c l o t h i n g was made p a r t l y or completely at home. Wood from uncleared p o r t i o n s of the property and hides from the few slaughtered l i v e s t o c k provided another source of m a t e r i a l s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y , A great d e a l of domestically-produced food and m a t e r i a l s d i d not show up on the account books, ledgers and tax assessments of r u r a l a r t i s a n s . To speak of the incomes of r u r a l , land h o l d i n g a r t i s a n s i s to acknowledge the combined work earnings of the craftsman and h i s f a m i l y and the unrecorded domestically—produced and consumed m a t e r i a l s of subsistence farming. These l a t t e r \" i n v i s i b l e \" earnings helped the a r t i s a n farmer accumulate cash and c r e d i t from h i s other sources i n t o a surplus f o r investment i n more l a n d , a b e t t e r or l a r g e r house or shop or barn to accommodate a l a r g e r , growing f a m i l y or to improve h i s working cap-a c i t i e s . I f he had sons, the a r t i s a n farmer was cu s t o m a r i l y o b l i g e d to attempt to secure land f o r t h e i r m a t u r i t y . Most farming a r t i s a n s d i d not produce s i g n i f i c a n t q u a n t i t i e s of marketable farm commodities. A few s k i n s , some shipments of g r a i n s , wool or f l a x were infrequent t r a n s a c t i o n s . The a r t i s a n ' s l i v e s t o c k 69 consumed most of h i s hay and h i s f a m i l y consumed most of the meat of h i s slaughtered animals. In f a c t , during the e a r l y years of h i s working l i f e , the a r t i s a n farmer was as l i k e l y to \"buy\" feed, meat and household g r a i n s as he was to s a t i s f y h i s own needs or produce a s u r p l u s . H is circumstances, needs and p r o d u c t i v i t y v a r i e d from year to year as h i s f a m i l y grew and h i s work h a b i t s adjusted to these changes. In time, as the r a t i o of c r a f t s work to farming s t a b i l i z e d , the a r t i s a n might expand h i s a g r i c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t i e s . But there were se r i o u s l i m i t a t i o n s to t h i s p r a c t i c e . Subsistence farming on ten to f i f t e e n acres required some 100 i n d i v i d u a l working days f o r seeding, weeding, haying,harvesting and r e l a t e d work. During the f a l l and winter another f o r t y or f i f t y days would be taken up i n g r a i n t h r e s h i n g , corn husking, f l a x breaking, c a r t i n g g r a i n , stones and s u p p l i e s , and c a r i n g f o r l i v e s t o c k . A l l of t h i s would produce a range of foods and c l o t h i n g and some other m a t e r i a l needs f o r the immediate use of the f a m i l y ; any surplus was used as b a r t e r f o r manufactured items and some other l a b o r or s e r v i c e requirements and o c c a s i o n a l l y a small surplus could be s o l d o u t side the community.\"*\"\"^ For a s i n g l e man t h i s work o b l i g a t i o n consumed h a l f of h i s annual time and l a b o r . He was l e f t w i t h an equal amount of time i n which to p r a c t i c e h i s c r a f t or other v o c a t i o n and produce s u f f i c i e n t income or c r e d i t to meet h i s other extensive m a t e r i a l requirements. U s u a l l y , w i t h a good trade and s u f f i c i e n t energy and f i n a n c i a l prudence, the a r t i s a n - f a r m e r remained solvent and even managed to improve h i s m a t e r i a l c o n d i t i o n . But the extent to which he could expand h i s a g r i c u l t u r a l production was always l i m i t e d . The presence of h i s sons and the b e n e f i t s of t h e i r added labor was u s u a l l y temporary; the young males, as they matured, expected to be made independent from t h e i r f a t h e r s . O c c a s i o n a l l y , a son d i d remain to help the a r t i s a n -farmer enlarge h i s farming operation but the normal course of events u s u a l l y prevented t h i s . Otherwise, the a r t i s a n could only i n crease '.. h i s revenue and outside labor a i d by i n c r e a s i n g h i s c r a f t s produc-t i v i t y and there were r e s t r i c t i o n s of time and means to t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e . E x t r a c u l t i v a t e d land could not alone ensure a l a r g e r farming a c t i v i t y without a concomitant of cheap and p l e n t i f u l farm l a b o r . The l a t t e r was not a v a i l a b l e i n any important numbers i n 16 p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts. Thus the r u r a l a r t i s a n s p l i t h i s time between h i s c r a f t and h i s farm. In some cases the amount of l a n d , number of sons and other sources of income permitted an a r t i s a n to devote as much as 80% of h i s time and work to farming; i n other cases the r a t i o could be a c c u r a t e l y i n v e r t e d . Normally a 40% farm-work to 60% craft-work balance was s t r u c k . Even i n cases where an a r t i s a n ' s c r a f t work brought a higher r e t u r n i n l a b o r owed to him, i t was seldom s u f f i c i e n t , over the short or long term, to permit s u b s t a n t i a l farm expansion. The a r t i s a n t h e r e f o r e u s u a l l y s e t t l e d upon a l i f e - l o n g mixture of trades work and farming. The advantages to c o n v e r t i n g , over time, to f u l l — s c a l e farming were not as promising as they might have been i n a cash-crop, 71 labor-cheap economy. Rather, i n the l i m i t e d and s m a l l - s c a l e r u r a l economies of eighteenth century Massachusetts, the subsistence farmer was o b l i g e d a l s o to be a non-farm worker and the a r t i s a n was re q u i r e d to be and chose to be a part-time and subsistence farmer. The la b o r needs of i n d i v i d u a l communities and of l a r g e r r e g i o n a l areas were v a r i a b l e . Respective s i z e of towns, t h e i r age, l o c a t i o n , a r a b l e s o i l q u a n t i t y and timber and mineral d e p o s i t s a l l c o n t r i b u t e d to the s p e c i f i c economic standards and p r a c t i c e s and work patterns i n the i n d i v i d u a l town. As few as 70% and as many as 95% of f a m i l y heads and adul t males occupied c u l t i v a t e d or ara b l e land w i t h i n s p e c i f i c towns. But d e s p i t e these v a r i a t i o n s and the enormously wide range of i n d i v i d u a l acreage h o l d i n g s , from as l i t t l e as one acre to as much as s e v e r a l hundred ac r e s , n e a r l y 65% of r u r a l Massachusetts f a m i l i e s farmed between ten and f i f t y acres. This i s not to suggest a composite or \"average\" a g r i c u l t u r a l town f o r p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts; but a m a j o r i t y of communities d i d share c e r t a i n common a g r i c u l t u r a l , economic, v o c a t i o n a l and popu l a t i o n f e a t u r e s . The p o i n t to be made here i s that ten to twenty acres of mixed c u l t i v a t e d land were as much as an eighteenth century f a m i l y could farm e f f e c t i v e l y . This same acreage was i n s u f f i c i e n t to produce enough p r o f i t to completely supply that f a m i l y ' s m a t e r i a l needs. The phenomenon of combined occupations i n t h i s s o c i e t y i s understandable on that b a s i s . ^ The s o c i a l purposes and imperatives of the founders and s e t t l e r s of Massachusetts and t h e i r 72 successors when added to the economic l i m i t a t i o n s of i t s a g r i c u l t u r e , were at the core of the province's r u r a l l a b o r economy. The supremacy of the f a m i l y u n i t ensconced oh i t s small subsistence farm, and the absence of e i t h e r a dominant manufacturing f a c i l i t y or a commercial cash crop, r e q u i r e d workers to be f l e x i b l e , s e l f - r e l i a n t and m u l t i - s k i l l e d . Thus, w h i l e they enjoyed a measure of independence, i n terms of d i s p o s a l of t h e i r l a b o r s , they were r e q u i r e d to be i n t e r -dependent w i t h the needs and o p p o r t u n i t i e s of t h e i r communities. The a r t i s a n - f a r m e r stands as a model case of the i n d i v i d u a l worker's involvement i n the economic l i f e of the r u r a l town. I t f u r t h e r demonstrates the i n d i v i d u a l ' s wide l a b o r f l e x i b i l i t y . Today, most of the ar t i s a n - f a r m e r s of r u r a l pre-Revolutionary Massachusetts would be considered \"self-employed\" and i n a very s t r i c t sense, con-temporaneously, they were. But e s s e n t i a l l y they exchanged t h e i r s k i l l s , l a b o r and produce f o r the s k i l l s , l a b o r and produce of others. The c e n t r a l place of the farm i n the l i v e s of those a r t i s a n s can be accounted a personal preference as much as a n e c e s s i t y . For c e r t a i n l y i n many cases a r u r a l a r t i s a n , i n some communities, could have supported a f a m i l y from the income of h i s c r a f t . But the possession of farm land afforded him an added means of labor exchange i n the b a r t e r economy as w e l l as a measure of m a t e r i a l s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y . And s o c i a l l y , the farm provided him w i t h a f i x e d property w i t h i n the community where he could f u n c t i o n more e f f e c t i v e l y as a domestic p a t r i a r c h and a p o l i t i c a l p a r t i c i p a n t under the t r a d i t i o n a l P u r i t a n 73 c r i t e r i a of church membership and residency. Although the concept of l a n d l e s s property — \"personal wealth\" — was e s t a b l i s h e d i n the p r o v i n c e , most r u r a l a r t i s a n could not ensure a p o r t a b l e legacy f o r t h e i r successors, even though the law permitted the i n h e r i t a n c e of personal wealth. Land, i t s c u l t i v a t i o n and the t r a n s m i s s i o n of farming h a b i t s , a learned s k i l l and a p o s s i b l e i n h e r i t a n c e of land were the surest and soundest means of legacy i n t h i s s o c i e t y . Thus was c o n t i n u i t y assured. Land was passed on by p a r t i b l e i n h e r i t a n c e i n Massachusetts. There was no cash to bequeath, and no c a p i t a l i n v e s t -ment stocks i n trade and commerce to pass on, but there was the endowment of an attachment to the land and i t s ancient economic and c u l t u r a l purposes, and the communication to youth of a learned and u s e f u l a l t e r n a t i v e work s k i l l . The r u r a l a r t i s a n looked backward to the experience of h i s predecessors and forward i n time to h i s own needs as he labored to support himself and h i s f a m i l y . And beyond the m a t e r i a l p r o v i s i o n s of h i s work he sought to confirm the s o c i a l 18 and c u l t u r a l p r i o r i t i e s of h i s s o c i e t y . Economically, the a r t i s a n a p p l i e d h i s c r a f t to the extent that personal circumstances and l o c a l c o n d i t i o n s would a l l o w . By h i s i n d u s t r y , s k i l l and care he could add small p a r c e l s of land to h i s present holdings f o r the f u t u r e needs of h i s f a m i l y . The r u r a l a r t i s a n seldom farmed more than twenty or so acres or achieved s u f f i c i e n t wealth to abandon h i s c r a f t , employ men f u l l time and c u l t i v a t e more land f o r f u l l - t i m e farming; but he s t i l l saw h i s f a m i l y ' s f u t u r e i n terms of land. The ends of s k i l l e d 19 la b o r i n r u r a l s o c i e t y were focused upon a g r i c u l t u r e . 74 While the a g r i c u l t u r a l s e t t i n g d i c t a t e d the p r i n c i p a l aims of s k i l l e d l a b o r , other f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c e d i t s p r e c i s e form and a p p l i c a t i o n . I t has been noted that the conduct of s k i l l e d l a b o r was modified by the s i z e , composition and m a t e r i a l requirements of l o c a l communities, and by the methods of labor and m a t e r i a l b a r t e r and exchange that were p r a c t i c e d l o c a l l y . The a r t i s a n as independent businessman was another f e a t u r e of s k i l l e d l a b o r i n the r u r a l economy. To a c e r t a i n extent, a l l s k i l l e d workers i n p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y were entrepreneurs. That i s to say, they performed as workers who produced a marketable product or s e r v i c e f o r t h e i r own d i s p o s a l . As such they sought to c o n t r o l the e n t i r e m a t e r i a l supply, l a b o r and d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e i r c r a f t s o p e r a t i o n . The b l a c k s m i t h , f o r example, when he could, leased or rented a c o a l p i t or a wood-lot f o r cord wood as f u e l supply f o r h i s shop forge. I f he manufactured a great d e a l of farm implements he might cooperate i n a j o i n t ownership of a bloomery and i r o n forge where he could secure q u a n t i t i e s of working i r o n . I f t h i s was not f e a s i b l e he might \" r e n t \" time at a p r i v a t e l y owned forge and produce h i s own rough metals. I f he was f o r t u n a t e , he might be reasonably c l o s e to a s l i t t i n g m i l l from which he could r e a d i l y o b t a i n s u p p l i e s of sheet, bar and f i n i s h e d bulk i r o n . Otherwise he was subject to high m a t e r i a l c o s t s and cartage charges; and so i t was w i t h most independent a r t i s a n s . They a s p i r e d to own or share or be c l o s e to a source of raw m a t e r i a l s u p p l i e s . The blacksmith Chamberlin, f o r example, owned a \" c o a l p i t . \" F o l l o w i n g t h i s p r i n c i p l e many 75 b r i c k l a y e r s were a l s o brickmakers, carpenters were sawyers and shoe-makers d i d t h e i r own tanning wherever p o s s i b l e . Many weaver-farmers kept l a r g e f l o c k s of sheep and a l l o t t e d more of t h e i r t i l l a g e acreage to f l a x . The p r i n c i p l e at stake was c o n t r o l . C o n t r o l of the sources of m a t e r i a l s meant l e s s b a r t e r i n g and fewer arrangements w i t h s u p p l i e r s i n an economy dominated by m u l t i p l e trade and l a b o r agreements and exchanges. The a r t i s a n a l s o was determined to c o n t r o l the f i n i s h e d product of h i s c r a f t . The l a t t e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n was probably more important to the i n d i v i d u a l craftsman than resource ownership or c o n t r o l . By possessing f r e e d i s p o s a l of the u l t i m a t e use of h i s l a b o r the a r t i s a n could be both s e l e c t i v e i n h i s choice of whom he d e a l t w i t h and f l e x i b l e when he had to be. The s c a l e and o p e r a t i o n of the l o c a l economy a s s i s t e d and perpetuated the a r t i s a n ' s independent d i s p o s a l of h i s l a b o r . Most r u r a l b l a c k s m i t h s , shoemakers, carpenters, weavers, t a i l o r s and other tradesmen d i d \"bespoke\" work and seldom produced items f o r s a l e i n an unknown market or to anonymous purchasers. Most a r t i s a n work at the r u r a l l e v e l was contracted i n advance by i n d i v i d u a l u s e r s , and terms of p r i c e , or b a r t e r or l a b o r exchange were mutually 21 agreed upon before work was done. But some \"stock manufacture\" d i d occur. In a c e n t r a l and h i g h volume trade such as shoemaking, a l o c a l a r t i s a n w i t h a good r e p u t a t i o n and a w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d and p r e d i c t a b l e demand could a n t i c i p a t e the p a r t i c u l a r footwear needs of h i s customers. I f h i s share of the l o c a l market was s t a b l e , the shoemaker might make shoes 76 i n advance of a c t u a l need or request. A l s o , footwear was manufactured on a small s c a l e f o r r e t a i l s a l e i n Boston and o c c a s i o n a l l y f o r export to other c o l o n i e s . But t h i s p r a c t i c e , when i t d i d occur was i r r e g u l a r and was always t a n g e n t i a l or secondary to the r o l e of the shoemaker as a l o c a l craftsman supplying the needs of h i s l o c a l community. Residence, a g r i c u l t u r e and c r a f t were the normal dominant i n f l u e n c e s 22 on the r u r a l shoemaker. S t i l l , i t was o f t e n necessary f o r a young journeyman shoemaker to make shoes on contract f o r another shoemaker. E a r l y i n h i s career, w h i l e devoting h i s summers to farming and h i s winters to h i s c r a f t , he o f t e n made shoes, f o r wages, f o r a l o c a l \"master shoemaker.\" At the same time, u s u a l l y working i n h i s farmhouse, he d e a l t . d i r e c t l y , on 23 h i s own b e h a l f , w i t h i n d i v i d u a l customers and f a m i l i e s . In t h i s manner, he b u i l t a r e p u t a t i o n , acquired a r e g u l a r c l i e n t e l e and took part i n the usu a l b a r t e r and l a b o r exchange of the l o c a l a g r i c u l t u r a l community. The formal arrangement w i t h the \"master shoemaker\" helped him r e g u l a t e h i s income while he e s t a b l i s h e d h i s independent s t a t u s i n the community. U s u a l l y i n these cases the r e t a i l e r s u p p l i e d the young shoemaker w i t h stock l e a t h e r and heels and purchased a f i x e d , contracted number of shoes. The master shoemaker then marketed those shoes to an ou t s i d e d i s t r i b u t o r or to h i s own l o c a l customers. As the young shoemaker matured and began r e g u l a t i n g h i s income and improving h i s own economic c o n d i t i o n he sometimes \" reversed t h i s procedure and •in turn \"employed\" other young journeymen to whom he paid wages f o r contracted shoes. But there was not enough demand f o r t h i s system 77 of shoemaking to ensure f u l l - t i m e and f u t u r e s e c u r i t y and whatever measure of p r o s p e r i t y was a v a i l a b l e to the a r t i s a n . Therefore, the r u r a l shoemaker, even when s u c c e s s f u l , seldom r e l i n q u i s h e d h i s p r a c t i c e 24 of farming i n season and making shoes to order f o r l o c a l townspeople. By working n e a r l y every day i n h i s shop, an energetic and s k i l l e d shoemaker could produce approximately s i x t y p a i r s of shoes of a l l kinds i n a busy winter season. With an o c c a s i o n a l c o n t r a c t to supply shoes f o r an outside market, a l o c a l shoemaker, along w i t h h i s apprentice and one or two contracted journeymen could make twelve p a i r s 25 of shoes a week. And there was no d i v i s i o n of f u n c t i o n , s p e c i a l t y or l a b o r i n p r o v i n c i a l shoemaking; the \"cordwainer\" was expected to be capable of making a l l types of footwear from any design and he made a f i n i s h e d p a i r of shoes e n t i r e l y by himself from tanned l e a t h e r to product. Often, a servant or apprentice made wooden heels f o r the journeyman and o c c a s i o n a l l y these same helpers made l e a t h e r heels and so l e s f o r s p e c i f i c orders. And l o c a l shoemakers d i d buy pre-made wooden heels from l o c a l woodworkers or from Boston merchants. But the t y p i c a l shoe or boot i n r u r a l p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts was made 26 e n t i r e l y by a s i n g l e shoemaker. And as w i t h most other h a n d i c r a f t s , the cost of labor involved i n a p a i r of shoes was roughly 30% to 40% of the t o t a l p r i c e . This p r o p o r t i o n was constant throughout the f i r s t h a l f of the eighteenth century and was matched i n other trades such as weaving, t a i l o r i n g , harness-making and bla c k s m i t h work such 27 as implement and t o o l manufacture. The r e l a t i v e cost of l a b o r , i n 78 the f i n a l production of a commodity, was i n v a r i a b l y l e s s than h a l f i t s r e t a i l or exchange valu e . Shoemaking was one of the most popular of p r e - i n d u s t r i a l c r a f t s and could be studied and perf e c t e d by an a l e r t a pprentice i n as 28 few as three years. I t was, t h e r e f o r e , a common trade among many who would otherwise have been u n s k i l l e d . The wide use of l e a t h e r i n t h i s s o c i e t y made shoemaking and other l e a t h e r trades very competitive. The demand f o r l e a t h e r goods was steady, h i g h and u n i v e r s a l . Harness-making was, along w i t h shoe-making, a high-volume trade and one that was v i t a l to the a g r a r i a n s o c i e t y . Some l e a t h e r workers combined the two f u n c t i o n s , but there was normally enough l o c a l demand f o r harnesses to encourage a sep a r a t i o n of the two manufactures. While t h i s d i s -c ussion i s focused on shoemakers, i t should be noted that many of the l a b o r , b a r t e r and production p r i n c i p l e s , and a s i m i l a r s e a s o n a l i t y of shop-work, a p p l i e d e q u a l l y to harnessmakers. In t h i s atmosphere, the more s u c c e s s f u l shoemakers of the period possessed not only b e t t e r than average s k i l l s and a r e l i a b l e and high degree of personal pro-d u c t i v i t y , but had d e l i b e r a t e l y emphasized t h e i r trade i n the allotment of t h e i r time. In a town of 200 to 300 f a m i l i e s , there might be as many as eight shoemakers — u s u a l l y a l l part-time farmers — a l l of whom were dependent upon a c e r t a i n amount of c r a f t s work. Some were content w i t h a marginal or i r r e g u l a r a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e i r trade w h i l e others pursued q u a n t i t y production v i g o r o u s l y . In any case, those who prospered by t h e i r trade a l s o tended to t h e i r a g r i c u l t u r a l sub-s i s t e n c e i n c l o s e tandem w i t h t h e i r c r a f t s and e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l a c t i v i t i e s . 79 The range of p r o d u c t i v i t y by shoemaker-farmers was from twenty-f i v e to 150 p a i r s of shoes and boots a year. There was l i t t l e s p e c i a l -i z a t i o n i n the r u r a l shoemaking trades; i n d i v i d u a l s d i d not, f o r example, concentrate on making only or p r i m a r i l y a s p e c i f i c k i n d of shoe such as expensive r i d i n g or dress boots. Most shoemakers were compelled to d e a l w i t h a v a r i e t y of customers w i t h whom they d i d a v a r i e t y of business and so were n e c e s s a r i l y v e r s a t i l e i n the range of product they made. Some shoemakers, on t h e i r own and without other journeymen under c o n t r a c t , could do an a s t o n i s h i n g volume of work. High p r o d u c t i v i t y would b r i n g a shoemaker the s e r v i c e s of a great v a r i e t y of c l i e n t s . As noted, f i f t y separate customers a year was not unusual f o r a busy r u r a l a r t i s a n . The u n i v e r s a l need f o r shoes and the d i r e c t , s u p p l i e r to user r e l a t i o n s h i p meant that a productive shoe-maker was i n contact w i t h the broadest p o s s i b l e spectrum of l o c a l s o c i e t y ; customers who were involved i n most aspects of the r u r a l economy. Consequently, at l e a s t three-quarters of a competent and busy shoemaker's income was derived from goods and la b o r exchanged f o r shoes. In some years, f o r example, some shoemaker-farmers had t h e i r a g r i c u l t u r a l work conducted almost e n t i r e l y by c l i e n t - s u r r o g a t e s who had obtained shoes i n exchange f o r labor or s e r v i c e s . As an example of the range of contacts two., tradesman might have, and the extent of the b a r t e r system i n v o l v e d i n the a r t i s a n ' s economy — and the community g e n e r a l l y — the f o l l o w i n g t r a n s a c t i o n s are t y p i c a l and q u i t e i l l u s t r a t i v e . Late i n the p r o v i n c i a l p eriod 80 John Reed was a farmer-shoemaker i n r u r a l S u f f o l k county, about twelve m i l e s from Boston. In the twelve months f o l l o w i n g February 1742/3 he recorded accounts w i t h over t h i r t y separate customers. A l l h i s t r a n s a c t i o n s were given a monetary value but v i r t u a l l y no money was exchanged. Among the items Reed recei v e d as c r e d i t were hi d e s , m i l k , r y e , c a l f - s k i n s , f a t , cash, t u r n i p s , f l a x , honey, meat, earthenware, an almanac, dry f i s h , two p i g s , wool, s a l t , hay, molasses, o i l , plums, b i s c u i t s , c i d e r , casks and f i s h . For house c o n s t r u c t i o n or r e p a i r , Reed rece i v e d p o s t s , r a i l s , 1,000 s h i n g l e s , 1,000 b r i c k s , pavements, l i m e , clapboards and planks; a l l were gained i n b a r t e r . A l s o , as b a r t e r , Reed re c e i v e d f o r h i s shop, \"four dozen h e e l s , \" \"a s i d e of cured l e a t h e r \" and tacks. Apart from goods, Reed bartered f o r the l a b o r of o t h e r s ; from a c l i e n t ' s s l a v e \"Sambo, s p l i t t i n g r a i l s , plowing, d r i v i n g plow two a c r e s , s l i d i n g s i x loads of wood.\" From the white servant of a customer, Reed was given \"a days p l a n t i n g , one day t h a t c h i n g a barn, a day's work hoeing and m o r t i s i n g e i g h t p o s t s , \" From the labor of customers themselves, he r e c e i v e d \" c a r t i n g dung and hay,\" \" h e l p i n g i n c a r r y i n g hay,\" \" c a r t i n g corn,\" \" c a r t i n g stones,\" \"gathering corn and p i c k i n g apples,\" \" c a r t i n g hides to B r a i n t r e e , \" and \"hoeing, mowing and b u t c h e r i n g . \" For the c o n s t r u c t i o n of h i s d w e l l i n g , Reed c r e d i t e d a mason w i t h chimney work, l a y i n g paths, making mortar, underpinning and \"you and N a t h a n i e l ' s work.\" From a b l a c k s m i t h he r e c e i v e d some axe sharpening, a s p i n d l e and a hoe. A t a i l o r provided him w i t h a f r o c k , a doublet and a j a c k e t and breeches, 81 and \" d r i v i n g my plow\" and \"your w i f e f o r work\" ( u n s p e c i f i e d ) . Reed a l s o had a deed w r i t t e n and \"borrowed horses.\" He balanced a l l these goods and s e r v i c e s w i t h shoemaking and shoe r e p a i r . As l a t e as 1764, whi l e operating a twenty-acre farm, Reed worked a l l or part of 250 days making and r e p a i r i n g shoes. Jacob Adams, a shoemaker w i t h s i m i l a r p r a c t i c e s , who l i v e d i n Essex at the beginning of the p r o v i n -c i a l p e r i o d , farmed over twenty acres, yet i n 1700 he spent n e a r l y 29 200 days i n h i s shop. A good shoemaker, l i k e other s u c c e s s f u l r u r a l a r t i s a n s , c o u l d , by exchange and produ c t i o n , provide himself and f a m i l y w i t h many goods and s e r v i c e s f o r r e g u l a r a g r i c u l t u r a l and domestic needs and uses. But some long-term assets accrued from the surplus value of s u c c e s s f u l a r t i s a n work. A shoemaker could buy an acre or two of land or arrange a long-term lease by c o n t r a c t i n g to supply a c e r t a i n f a m i l y ' s footwear needs over s e v e r a l years. This kind of arrangement had to be mutually tenable and agreeable, of course. I f i t was, i t could b e n e f i t both p a r t i e s by ensuring some f u t u r e needs and improving the economic c o n d i t i o n s of the i n d i v i d u a l s and f a m i l i e s i n v o l v e d . The surrender of an acre of land by exchange f o r l a b o r , or the le a s e r i g h t s to s e v e r a l acres, was o f t e n a very p r a c t i c a l means of b a r t e r f o r a landowner — o f t e n an a r t i s a n himself — to ensure an u n i n -t e r r u p t e d long-term supply of one of h i s f a m i l y ' s b a s i c n e c e s s i t i e s , i n t h i s case footwear. For the shoemaker, t h i s form of long-term labor-product arrangement was a convenient and manageable means of p r o v i d i n g a f i x e d asset f o r h i s f a m i l y ' s f u t u r e . Some shoemakers could have new houses or workshops or barns b u i l t f o r them, using m a t e r i a l s acquired or owed i n b a r t e r , and c o n t r a c t i n g the c o n s t r u c t i o n to a carpenter w i t h whom a long-term shoe supply arrangement had been made. A l l a r t i s a n - f a r m e r s and t h e i r f a m i l i e s shared common needs, wants and expectations. This brought most i n t o d i r e c t contact w i t h each other, i n some degree, at some time i n a l l communities. The d i v e r s i t y of t a l e n t s involved i n a commonly—shared economy r e s u l t e d i n a f l u i d 30 system of b a r t e r and a permanent s o c i a l connection. A few shoemakers worked up to 95% of the time at t h e i r c r a f t . Such was the l o c a l demand f o r footwear that the e f f i c i e n t shoemaker could use shoe manufacture and r e p a i r as h i s only means of b a r t e r exchange. He might even produce shoes during the a g r i c u l t u r a l season w h i l e others contracted to do h i s farm work f o r him. The shoemaker-farmer best e x e m p l i f i e s the low-cash nature of the l o c a l r u r a l economy. With h i s wide ranging c l i e n t e l e and t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l resources and s k i l l s , the busy r u r a l shoemaker had v i r t u a l l y no need f o r money. His taxes could be paid i n h i s or a debtor's farm produce or by the money 31 payment of someone who was indebted to him. I f h i s c o n t r i b u t i o n to the c o n s t r u c t i o n or r e p a i r of the l o c a l meeting house was paid f o r him by a l o c a l g r i s t or saw m i l l operator f o r example, the shoe-maker could r e t i r e the debt w i t h shoes — a commodity always i n demand. In these communities even the m i n i s t e r s of the l o c a l congregations were drawn i n t o the steady and p e r s i s t e n t p r a c t i c e of b a r t e r exchange. S a l a r i e s were seldom paid e n t i r e l y i n cash and the m i n i s t e r s were o f t e n landowners and part-time farmers and were o b l i g e d to engage i n the l o c a l exchange and c i r c u l a t i o n of goods and s e r v i c e s . The normal p e r q u i s i t e s of the church were always given i n the form of farm produce 32 h a n d i c r a f t products and f r e e work. To speak of wages i n p r o v i n c i a l r u r a l Massachusetts i s to r e f e r to the r e l a t i v e value of s k i l l e d to u n s k i l l e d work, which i t s e l f was t i e d to the b a s i c values of c e r t a i n f o o d s t u f f s , m a t e r i a l s and goods. These i n t u r n r e f l e c t e d the t a n g i b l e value of the combined m a t e r i a l and l a b o r involved i n the p r o v i s i o n of a commodity or s e r v i c e . R e l a t i v e s c a r c i t y and p l e n t i t u d e moderated a l l v a l u e s , of course, but f o r the s k i l l e d a r t i s a n h i s work-time and product represented a f i x e d value i n b a r t e r . A p a i r of o r d i n a r y men's work or walking shoes was worth two days mowing or a bushel of wheat or a day's carpentry; two cords of firewood or twenty pounds of horse or ste e r hide. The system of b a r t e r was at once the cause and the s o l u t i o n of the p a u c i t y of 33 specie and paper money i n these r u r a l towns. The b a r t e r system survived i n t h i s s e t t i n g f o r a number of reasons, not the l e a s t of which was i t s simple u t i l i t y i n the p a r o c h i a l community. But there were other reasons why b a r t e r , and not cash, was prevalent i n the economic a f f a i r s of the r u r a l communities, and c h i e f among those was the absence of a c e n t r a l p r o v i n c i a l agency to r e g u l a t e a s t a b l e and r e l i a b l e currency and i s s u e l o c a l coinage and b i l l s based upon systematic production and purchasing v a l u e s . Otherwise, the money used i n Massachusetts was drawn from everywhere i n the A t l a n t i c 84 world; i t s flow was small and i r r e g u l a r and i t s values were always subject to change. Moreover, without a l a r g e wage-labor component i n the working p o p u l a t i o n , the small p r o v i n c i a l communities had l i t t l e need f o r cash as a medium of exchange. The b a r t e r system o b l i g e d the community to f u n c t i o n more as an i n t e g r a t e d economic u n i t than might have been the case otherwise. The constant and f l u i d exchange of labor permeated the working and s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s of a l l r e s i d e n t s to the poin t where a h i g h l y i n d i v i d u a l i z e d process of l a b o r exchange r e s u l t e d and was maintained. The d e a l i n g s between one a r t i s a n and another normally produced a d i r e c t exchange of s e r v i c e or product of the r e s p e c t i v e c r a f t s of the two p a r t i e s . From u n s k i l l e d workers, farm labor and assorted menial work s e r v i c e was obtained. From p a r t l y - s k i l l e d workers the a r t i s a n could round out h i s m a t e r i a l and s e r v i c e requirements. Some such r e l a t i o n s h i p s were maintained over many years and even f o r l i f e t i m e s . Those workers who possessed no p r e c i s e c r a f t and who farmed fewer than ten acres were o b l i g e d to g r e a t l y d i v e r s i f y t h e i r work a c t i v i t y . The s e m i - s k i l l e d handyman or j a c k - o f - a l l - t r a d e s was a common fe a t u r e of r u r a l towns. One such worker — John P o r t e r — who farmed only f i v e acres of l a n d , was a l s o a c a r t e r , c i d e r maker, inf o r m a l weaver, wood sawyer, c o a l digger and general l a b o r e r . Others proved u s e f u l i n the l o c a l economies by being v e r s a t i l e and e f f i c i e n t i n a number of other necessary work f u n c t i o n s . In de a l i n g s between John Reed, the shoemaker, f o r i n s t a n c e , and John P o r t e r , the handyman, 85 the former would provide only shoes and i n r e t u r n would have h i s apples pressed to c i d e r , some of h i s own f i b e r s woven i n t o c l o t h and most of h i s cartage done f o r him. There would be some i s o l a t e d exchanges of farm work to help balance the j o i n t l a b o r and s e r v i c e account. C a r t i n g was e s s e n t i a l to a l l a r t i s a n - f a r m e r s i n the province. I t was needed to t r a n s p o r t g r a i n to the l o c a l m i l l , of course. But f o r the a r t i s a n , cartage was v i t a l to the movement and d e l i v e r y of raw m a t e r i a l s such as lumber, h i d e s , metals and other s t o c k s , s u p p l i e s and products. On the farm, cordwood had to be moved and stones c l e a r e d from f i e l d s , A team and wagon were not beyond the means of the i n d i v i d u a l f a r m e r - a r t i s a n , but the work of c a r t i n g 34 was time consuming and involved heavy manual l a b o r . Otherwise the s e m i - s k i l l e d worker k i l l e d and skinned the beef and swine of the busy a r t i s a n . Perhaps, too, he s t i t c h e d some rough c l o t h e s or wove some l i n e n or wool, made beer and c i d e r and sent h i s sons to hoe, weed and mow f o r others. By spreading h i s work a c t i v i t i e s w idely and v a r i o u s l y he developed u s e f u l s k i l l s and exper-ience. U s u a l l y he was a man of some n a t i v e t a l e n t and d e x t e r i t y who could help a carpenter by measuring and sawing wood and n a i l i n g , s h i n g l i n g or performing other r e l a t e d t a s k s . For the shoemaker or l e a t h e r worker he might tan hides or cu r r y them; f o r the bla c k s m i t h he might do s k i l l e d l a b o r such as hammering implement p a r t s or sharpening hoes, axe heads and scythes. He would not do f i n i s h e d work or a l a r g e q u a n t i t y of work to the poin t where he might v i o l a t e 86 trades q u a l i f i c a t i o n s t a t u t e s and standards. But h i s partly-developed and manifold s k i l l s made him i n v a l u a b l e to many a r t i s a n s during e s p e c i a l l y busy pe r i o d s ; and h i s v e r s a t i l i t y afforded both he and the 35 community a s i n g l e f l e x i b l e source of l a b o r exchange. A semi-s k i l l e d worker w i t h a f a i r l y l a r g e household might r e q u i r e as many as twenty-five footwear t r a n s a c t i o n s a year, i n c l u d i n g new shoes and r e p a i r s . By being v e r s a t i l e and a v a i l a b l e f o r a l a r g e number of d i f f e r e n t jobs and s e r v i c e s , the s e m i - s k i l l e d worker was of great use to the shoemaker, i n t h i s case, and possessed the ready and d i r e c t means to pay f o r h i s footwear needs. These f l e x i b l e r e l a t i o n s h i p s helped s u s t a i n the comprehensive nature of community labor exchange. When a no n - a r t i s a n r e q u i r e d e x t r a f i e l d work f o r h i s own farm, an a r t i s a n would sometimes o b l i g e by r e d i r e c t i n g some menial labor which was owed to him, to the other's use. A debt f o r l a b o r , goods or s e r v i c e s could be bartered by the c r e d i t o r to a t h i r d p arty. The common method of re c o r d i n g these t r a n s a c t i o n s was by the ledger book system or by the issuance of personal c r e d i t notes which were exchanged among p a r t i c i p a n t s . As s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t as might be the i n d i v i d u a l a r t i s a n - f a r m e r , he too d i d some l a b o r i n g f o r o t h e r s , even u n s k i l l e d workers, on t h e i r lands or during the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a house or barn. He d i d i t f o r work c r e d i t , i f convenient, or as a v o l u n t a r y favor during times of need or f o r harvest emergency, f o r example. The p r a c t i c e of t r a n s f e r r i n g a l a b o r or s e r v i c e or commodity debt from one man to another was 87 conducted as f o l l o w s : I f a shoemaker owned a b l a c k s m i t h f o r a s c y t h e , f o r example, and was owed by another man f o r a p a i r of shoes, he might channel the labor of h i s debtor to the blacksmith's use and a l l three t r a n s a c t i o n s would be c l o s e d . As usual these arrangements 36 had to be amenable to a l l p a r t i e s . Other types of l a b o r s u r r o g a t i o n and c r e d i t t r a n s f e r were p r a c t i c e d too. I f a man was s u c c e s s f u l , a f f l u e n t or prominent enough to employ a servant, s l a v e or apprentice, he used that employee as a r e g u l a r means of p r o v i d i n g o u t s i d e l a b o r to r e t i r e debt or o b t a i n c r e d i t f o r s e r v i c e s or goods su p p l i e d to h i m s e l f . Always, the sons of a r t i s a n - f a r m e r s were i n d i s p e n s i b l e i n attending to the more rudimentary and menial farm tasks which might be owed to o t h e r s . In every way, v o c a t i o n a l and economic f l e x i b i l i t y was a key-note f o r i n d i v i d u a l s and f a m i l i e s i n the economic l i f e of the r u r a l community. Men had to be wide-ranging i n t h e i r work h a b i t s and f i n a n c i a l a s s o c i a t i o n s w i t h i n the otherwise s t a b l e s t r u c t u r e of the l o c a l economy. A r t i s a n s had to be v e r s a t i l e w i t h i n t h e i r c r a f t s . As noted, blacksmiths and shoemakers manufactured f i n i s h e d products; the former making a very wide range of a r t i c l e s . Often both processed the raw m a t e r i a l s that were necessary to t h e i r c r a f t s . The r u r a l carpenter was e s s e n t i a l l y a frame b u i l d e r , e r e c t i n g houses, barns, workshops, bridges and making a d d i t i o n s and r e p a i r s to e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s . But he a l s o d i d \"shop work,\" making f u r n i t u r e , c h e s t s , benches, wagons and other appliances. He r e p a i r e d and made pa r t s 88 f o r other wooden items, f a s h i o n i n g wheels, a x l e s , gates, doors and window frames, and he was capable of a host of v a r i e d carpentry work that was being done by c r a f t s s p e c i a l i s t s i n l a r g e r eighteenth century urban communities. The r u r a l carpenter made t o o l s such as spinning wheels and hoe, axe and scythe handles. Many r u r a l carpenters found themselves doing most of these carpentry jobs i n the space of one, two or a few years. He d i d hot, indeed he could not reduce h i s c r a f t to a s i n g l e s u b - s p e c i a l t y . N a t u r a l l y , some carpenters d i d more house carpentry than shop work, and v i c e v e r s a . But most were obl i g e d to d i v e r s i f y t h e i r s k i l l s and i n c l u d e a v a r i e t y of r e l a t e d 37 f u n c t i o n s , as l o c a l need d i c t a t e d . In b u i l d i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n work, the r u r a l carpenter i n the absence of a mason, might do some masonry, b r i c k l a y i n g and p l a s t e r i n g and here and there he would do p a i n t i n g , s h i n g l i n g and f e n c i n g ; though i n most cases, the i n d i v i d u a l householder d i d these l a t t e r j o b s . He might contract f o r the complete c o n s t r u c t i o n of a b u i l d i n g , as the \"housewright\" and sub-contract to one or two other carpenters. Or he might act as a sub-contractor h i m s e l f , to a s s i s t another carpenter or to do a s p e c i f i e d p o r t i o n of the c o n s t r u c t i o n . In house c o n s t r u c t i o n , the carpenter was the customary p r i n c i p a l c o n t r a c t o r . In t h i s e n t e r p r i s e the i n d u s t r y , v e r s a t i l i t y and genius of the r u r a l craftsman was given f u l l r e i n . Not only d i d the carpenter design and b u i l d the b a s i c house frame but the same man o f t e n completed the 89 general e x t e r i o r and i n t e r i o r c o n s t r u c t i o n . He made, hung and f i n i s h e d the doors, turned, shaped and i n s t a l l e d the s t a i r b a n i s t e r s , b u i l t the s t a i r c a s e and l a i d the s t a i r s and f l o o r s . When and i f necessary, he made and i n s t a l l e d the window frames and f i t t e d the g l a s s , and he could c u t , shape and apply ornamental woodwork. An experienced journeyman carpenter i n r u r a l Massachusetts, given adequate time, resources and labor a s s i s t a n c e , was capable of making every piece of f i n i s h e d wood that went i n t o the eighteenth century wooden frame b u i l d i n g and of e r e c t i n g and i n s t a l l i n g each pi e c e and a l l other 38 m a t e r i a l s according to h i s own plans. The s p e c i a l demands of b u i l d i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n meant that carpentry, among the s k i l l e d t r a d e s , r e q u i r e d long-term commitment and i n v o l v e d a s l i g h t d e v i a t i o n from the o r d i n a r y r u r a l a r t i s a n ' s labor h a b i t s . For most a r t i s a n s , of whatever c r a f t , contracted work or s e r v i c e involved numerous but b r i e f d u r a t i o n commitments. In terms of the r e l a t i v e s c a l e of time in v o l v e d i n many l o c a l j o b s , a horse could be shod i n an hour or two and a plow share could be made i n a week. I t took a day to make a p a i r of shoes or a simple j a c k e t and a 39 yard of l i n e n c l o t h could be woven i n an afternoon. But a l a r g e house took months to b u i l d and f i n i s h and a multi-purpose barn could take up to s e v e r a l weeks to complete. Therefore some r u r a l carpenters d i d become b u i l d i n g entrepreneurs and as such contracted l a r g e r c o n s t r u c t i o n p r o j e c t s . The normal procedure then would be f o r the c o n t r a c t o r s to sub-contract p o r t i o n s of the p r o j e c t to l o c a l carpenters; and many housewrights engaged young, sometimes l a n d l e s s carpenters f o r f u l l time employment of up to s i x months at a time. Other a c t i v e c o n s t r u c t i o n carpenters employed a servant l a b o r e r , who would agree to a term of short \" s e r v i t u d e \" — u s u a l l y f o r a f i x e d p e r i o d of s i x months or a year. This employee-servant was clothed and housed and fed by the carpenter and h i s labor c o n t r a c t would be mutually r e n e g o t i a b l e and renewable at the t e r m i n a t i o n of each indenture. During 1719-1720, f o r example, John Pearson, a \"house-w r i g h t , \" h i s servant and another carpenter worked on one house f o r 124 consecutive days under Pearson's sub-contract to a \"master b u i l d e r They spent a f u r t h e r 90 and. 82 days together r e s p e c t i v e l y on two other houses i n r u r a l Essex county, f o r other c o n t r a c t o r s . At the co n c l u s i o n of these c o n t r a c t s , the \"servant\" was rel e a s e d from h i s commitment and was paid a sum of earned money, \"beyond keep,\" which 40 had been wi t h h e l d by Pearson. Some carpenters, who concentrated t h e i r e f f o r t s on b u i l d i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n , f i l l e d i n the gaps between l a r g e r c o n t r a c t s by doing s k i l l e d shop work i f they had the opportun-i t y , and some became, by t u r n , expert cabinetmakers. A major s o c i a l and economic problem f o r these c o n s t r u c t i o n carpenters was geographical d i s t a n c e between home and work p r o j e c t . In most cases they had farms to attend to and here the employment of a servant could be doubly u s e f u l . To be sequestered f o r an extended period of time on a l a r g e p r o j e c t i n another town was normally inconvenient f o r the r u r a l carpenter. Hence, much carpentry work 91 was d i s t r i b u t e d as small jobs by the c o n t r a c t i n g housewright. He might c o n t r a c t one man to make the window frames or doors and another 41 to apply the clapboard or i n s t a l l the f l o o r s and so on. In t h i s manner most r u r a l carpenters managed to maintain t h e i r dual occupa-t i o n a l s t a t u s as both a r t i s a n and farmer. F u l l — t i m e carpentry i n c o n s t r u c t i o n was a p o t e n t i a l l y l u c r a t i v e a c t i v i t y i n the long term. But i t s f u t u r e b e n e f i t s could not be seen or touched. Only land and the annual y i e l d of the farm could provide a source of s e c u r i t y f o r the f u t u r e . The r u r a l economic laws of l i m i t e d market and widespread i n d i v i d u a l land ownership, combined w i t h a l a r g e number of a v a i l a b l e and competitive carpenters to shape the a t t i t u d e s , behavior and work-ing c o n d i t i o n s of these men. The r e s u l t was an \" i n d u s t r y \" that was l o c a l i z e d and made up of many i n d i v i d u a l s k i l l e d workers who each possessed a comprehensive range of v e r s a t i l e s k i l l s . The wider e f f e c t s of t h i s system l i m i t e d trades s p e c i a l i z a t i o n and retarded the develop-ment of dominant r e g i o n a l general c o n t r a c t o r s . The absence of a c e n t r a l i z e d c o n t r a c t i n g apparatus or a l e g a l or defacto s p e c i a l i z a t i o n i n r u r a l carpentry was customary a l s o i n the. l e a t h e r trades. The Massachusetts laws which i n s i s t e d on s t r i c t s e p a r a t i o n of the v a r i o u s stages of l e a t h e r production had been enacted to ensure q u a l i t y c o n t r o l of product and to s t a b i l i z e the supply and p r i c e of l e a t h e r ; the same laws had been prompted by Boston's trades c o l l e c t i v e s i n the e a r l y stage of seventeenth century s e t t l e -ment. But these ordinances were not appropriate or enforcable i n 92 the a g r i c u l t u r a l economy. In Boston, the tanning stage of l e a t h e r manufacture was kept d i s t i n c t from the c u r i n g and other primary processes, and a l l were performed by separate s p e c i a l i s t s . S i m i l a r l y , the production of harnesses, gloves, saddles, shoes and l e a t h e r c l o t h e s was done by a r t i s a n s who s p e c i a l i z e d and were regulated to manufacture a s i n g l e l e a t h e r product. But i n the r u r a l towns these f u n c t i o n s o f t e n were the v a r i e g a t e d p r a c t i c e of one man. The r u r a l shoemaker was sometimes a l s o a tanner and would process f r e s h hide through the many stages of l e a t h e r down to the p a i r of shoes he fashioned at h i s bench. Of course, i n the l o c a l b a r t e r economy surplus hides or dressed or tanned l e a t h e r appeared everywhere as exchange commodities and shoemakers bargained t h e i r s e r v i c e s f o r l e a t h e r that came from a v a r i e t y of sources. Some a r t i s a n - f a r m e r s tanned t h e i r own l e a t h e r and supplied shoemakers only w i t h enough m a t e r i a l f o r the shoes they r e q u i r e d f o r t h e i r own use. In l a r g e r r u r a l towns there was l e s s need or opportunity f o r a l o c a l shoemaker to tan hides or work l e a t h e r i n t o proper c o n d i t i o n ; but even here a complete s e p a r a t i o n of f u n c t i o n d i d not occur, and only r a r e l y were tanners e x c l u s i v e trades s p e c i a l -i s t s i n any r u r a l town. 4 3 Of a l l the c r a f t s p r a c t i c e d i n r u r a l p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts, shoemaking was the one most l i k e l y to evolve i n t o an organized wage-labor manufacturing i n d u s t r y . But a sound system of d i v i s i o n of l a b o r ; of pre-cut p a r t s and separate c o n s t r u c t i o n processes, c o n t r o l l e d r e -t a i l marketing and c e n t r a l o p e r a t i o n , d i d not ensue. Of a l l commodities, 93 the shoe and some forms of c l o t h i n g were high-volume items of s i m i l a r design, c o s t , purpose and wear. Men, women and c h i l d r e n u s u a l l y r e q u i r e d two p a i r s of shoes each a year i n t h i s s o c i e t y . Nearly 250,000 p a i r s of shoes were made i n the province annually i n the 44 decades p r i o r to the R e v o l u t i o n . Yet t h i s p o t e n t i a l was not e x p l o i t e d i n the form of a c e n t r a l i z e d , d i s c i p l i n e d , wage-labor i n d u s t r y . D i s t r i b u t i o n was only a l i m i t e d p r o h i b i t i o n because a twenty-mile r a d i u s market could have been accommodated from a s i n g l e , c e n t r a l manufacturing and d i s t r i b u t i o n l o c a t i o n . Nor was mechanical p r i m i t i v e n e s s a major r e s t r a i n t to production; some commercial shops i n Boston employed s e v e r a l men making shoes by hand f o r wages, f o r + 4 5 export. Yet i n r u r a l Massachusetts the i n d i v i d u a l l o c a l bespoke shoe-maker p r e v a i l e d . A combination of the str e n g t h of the b a r t e r system at the community l e v e l , the imperatives of a g r i c u l t u r e and the t r a d i t i o n a l emphasis on land ensured the s u r v i v a l of the independent shoemaker. A l l labor found a b a s i c place i n a g r i c u l t u r e and d i d not r e q u i r e the apparatus of an i n d u s t r i a l employer. A b a s i c l i v e l i h o o d could be derived from the land of each i n d i v i d u a l worker. F u r t h e r -more, without a cash flow or a wider use of b i l l s of c r e d i t , no i n d u s t r i a l i n v e s t o r could f u n c t i o n e f f e c t i v e l y on a s u b s t a n t i a l s c a l e . No i n v e s t o r or organizer could expect to i n t e r r u p t the h i g h l y p e r s o n a l -i z e d method of b a r t e r that e x i s t e d i n the r u r a l towns. For even i f he d i d base h i s operation on the exchange of h i s product f o r commodities and f u r t h e r exchanged those commodities f o r wages and raw 94 m a t e r i a l s , the u l t i m a t e aim of accumulating c a p i t a l would be defeated by the l o c a l absence of c a p i t a l and the patter n s of work of the l o c a l 46 populations. The b a r t e r system worked e f f i c i e n t l y i n the economic s t r u c t u r e s of the towns,it was in f o r m a l but b i n d i n g and v a r i a b l e by i t s p e r s o n a l i z e d operation. I t was f l e x i b l e because i t was i n d i v i d u a l -i z e d . Mass produced shoes, even i f they had been a v a i l a b l e , could not have competed w i t h the l o c a l l y made shoes of the farmer-shoemaker, because.he was part of a labor and goods exchange economy that made h i s product e a s i e r to acquire and pay f o r . Apart from the d i f f i c u l t y of o r g a n i z i n g independent shoemakers i n t o a f u l l — t i m e i n d u s t r i a l e n t e r p r i s e , any attempt to c e n t r a l i z e shoemaking, or weaving or c l o t h e s -making, would have intruded upon the working methods, t r a d i t i o n s and purposes of l o c a l s o c i e t y . The c l o s e i n t e g r a t i o n of a g r i c u l t u r e and a r t i s a n s h i p and the sc a l e of i n d i v i d u a l f a m i l y and community l a b o r was most c l e a r l y demonstrated i n l o c a l t e x t i l e and c l o t h i n g manufacturing p r a c t i c e s . V i r t u a l l y a l l spinning i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts was done i n the (home. The d i s t a f f members of every f a m i l y were r e s p o n s i b l e f o r spinning yarns f o r f a m i l y and household needs. F l a x thread was the most common yarn produced by t h i s s o c i e t y . Derived from the broken and spun f l a x b o l l , which was grown e a s i l y on n e a r l y every farm i n the p r o v i n c e , l i n e n was p l e n t i f u l and v e r s a t i l e . Wool was next i n qu a n t i t y and importance and some combination l i n e n and wool t e x t i l e s were made l o c a l l y . The m a j o r i t y of r u r a l households spun yarn s u f f i c i e n t f o r t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r f a b r i c and c l o t h i n g needs.**' But where the spinning wheel was a u n i v e r s a l household a p p l i a n c e , the looms required f o r weaving were f a r fewer and more c e n t r a l i z e d i n the . . 48 communities. Hence, most households contracted to have t h e i r own yarns woven by l o c a l journeymen weavers. The c l o t h s were u s u a l l y returned to the same households to be made i n t o bedding, l i n e n s and undergarments, and some c l o t h i n g . Most outer c l o t h i n g , of wool, l e a t h e r or linen-woolen mixes was made by l o c a l t a i l o r s . Towns were almost s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t i n supplying t h e i r l o c a l c l o t h i n g requirements. More elaborate and expensive c l o t h i n g would be brought i n t o the towns from Boston, or Salem, made there o f t e n from imported c l o t h s and a c c e s s o r i e s . Some l o c a l t a i l o r s imported f a b r i c s and made dress or fancy c l o t h i n g i n the towns. But most forms of p l a i n c l o t h i n g and c e r t a i n l y a l l work c l o t h i n g was made l o c a l l y , from l o c a l l y produced f i b e r s and woven 49 c l o t h s . Weavers u s u a l l y were capable of doing some t a i l o r i n g and many t a i l o r s combined weaving w i t h t h e i r clothesmaking p r a c t i c e s . But because of the volume and r e g u l a r i t y of the t e x t i l e and c l o t h i n g trades and the q u a n t i t i e s of c l o t h and c l o t h i n g r e q u i r e d to s a t i s f y them, the two trades were o f t e n separate or i f not, one or the other would be given emphasis by combination w e a v e r - t a i l o r s . \" ^ Some t a i l o r s , l i k e some.shoemakers, were occupied n e a r l y f u l l time w i t h t h e i r c r a f t s . But most were not. Again, the r e l a t i v e s i z e and l o c a t i o n of the community, the number of l o c a l p r a c t i t i o n e r s and the degree of competition, and the personal v o c a t i o n a l preferences 96 of i n d i v i d u a l craftsmen a l l determined the incidence and l e v e l of l i m i t e d s p e c i a l i z a t i o n . Weaving was done by many i n d i v i d u a l s , at. v a r i o u s l e v e l s of p r o f i c i e n c y , q u a l i t y and volume. I t was a marginal and winter-season e n t e r p r i s e f o r many far m e r - a r t i s a n s who happened to possess a loom; some others wove only f o r t h e i r personal needs w h i l e most towns contained s e v e r a l s k i l l e d and t r a i n e d weavers who could devote more time to q u a n t i t y production. For most part-time weavers the trade was very u s e f u l as a winter occupation, when reduced farm work made an a l t e r n a t i v e income source necessary. Thus many were encouraged to take up weaving and by t h i s process helped keep the trade d e c e n t r a l i z e d and competitive. Ebenezer Wright, a weaver i n Hampshire county i n the e a r l y eighteenth century,' r e g u l a r l y exchanged f i b e r s , bleaches and dyes w i t h four other independent weavers. He a l s o d i d some s p i n n i n g , k n i t t i n g and t a i l o r i n g . Even as the b u s i e s t weaver i n the town of Westford, Wright r e g u l a r l y exchanged h i s own farm l a b o r f o r that of h i s neighbors.\"'\"'\" As noted, some weaving was done by men who had not been apprenticed to the trade but who had learned the process i n f o r m a l l y and could i n c l u d e o c c a s i o n a l rough weaving i n t h e i r r e p e r t o i r e of i n f o r m a l s k i l l s . Another important determinant i n the s c a l e and d i s p e r s a l of l o c a l weaving was the mechanical l i m i t a t i o n s of the eighteenth century loom. Of course Cartwright's power loom d i d not appear u n t i l w e l l a f t e r 1785, but some innovations of mechanical technique and s i z e had been developed by 1760 i n England. But i n r u r a l p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts the most 97 common loom a v a i l a b l e was small and crude and whether hand or f o o t operated was s e v e r e l y l i m i t e d i n i t s productive c a p a c i t y . As evidence of the e f f e c t s m a l l - s c a l e weaving had on the r e t a r d a t i o n of weaving technology, the loom used i n Massachusetts had not advanced beyond the fixed-frame type. As V.S. C l a r k notes, \"the f l y - s h u t t l e loom was 52 not used . . . u n t i l a f t e r the R e v o l u t i o n . \" The cost of importing more s o p h i s t i c a t e d and l a r g e r looms was p r o h i b i t i v e even to r u r a l 53 weavers w i t h a busy trade. Moreover, the market c o n d i t i o n s i n the l o c a l communities presented formidable o b s t a c l e s to the p r o f i t a b i l i t y of an expensive l a r g e r , f a s t e r , more productive loom or one that produced f i n e r c l o t h s . The looms that d i d e x i s t i n r u r a l Massachusetts were, d e s p i t e being small and clumsy, s u i t e d to the part-time h a b i t s of l o c a l weaver-farmers and others who wove i n very small q u a n t i t i e s , at i r r e g u l a r i n t e r v a l s f o r i n d i v i d u a l customers. The a c q u i s i t i o n of wool, or f l a x and spun yarn, i n the course of a g r i c u l t u r a l production, household work and b a r t e r exchange meant that f a m i l i e s had access to most of t h e i r own raw t e x t i l e m a t e r i a l s . S t i l l , the independent weaver would, whenever p o s s i b l e , arrange f o r a supply of f i b e r s , to maintain a stock of m a t e r i a l s f o r c o n t r a c t work. But f u l l time s p e c i a l i z e d weaving operations r e q u i r e d f a i r l y l a r g e c a p i t a l investments i n raw m a t e r i a l s , b u i l d i n g s and implements. A steady flow and bulk storage of. m a t e r i a l s , l a r g e bleach and dye yards and f a c i l i t i e s , a d i s c i p l i n e d , sedentary work f o r c e and an inventory of v a r i o u s c l o t h types and s i z e s would have been necessary 54 f o r a c e n t r a l i z e d , bulk commercial weaving e n t e r p r i s e . L i k e commercial 98 l a r g e - s c a l e shoemaking, a s i n g l e , set and p r e d i c t a b l e market would have been r e q u i r e d . Again, l o c a l c o n d i t i o n s , p r a c t i c e s and t r a d i t i o n s f o r e s t a l l e d the development of c e n t r a l i z e d t e x t i l e p roduction. As w i t h shoemaking, a p o t e n t i a l commercial e n t e r p r i s e was l e f t to i n d i v i d u a l a r t i s a n s . The most a c t i v e r u r a l weavers a l l o t t e d perhaps o n e - t h i r d of t h e i r working year to weaving. A production of 250 yards of woven t e x t i l e s was considered a busy year f o r a r u r a l weaver. To s t r e s s the general part-time nature of l o c a l weaving i t should be noted that a competent weaver, operating a small hand loom, and working s i x t y hours a week a l l year, could produce 1,000 yards of c l o t h i n eighteenth century Massachusetts.^^ S i m i l a r l y , most r u r a l t a i l o r s devoted l e s s than s i x months of any year to clothesmaking. The i n d i v i d u a l t a i l o r - f a r m e r survived because he could cater to the c l o t h i n g needs of customers whose pur-chasing c a p a c i t y was steady over the long term but u n p r e d i c t a b l e from day to day or season to season. Moreover, the means of payment were of such an e r r a t i c and p e r s o n a l i z e d nature that only an indepen-dent, f l e x i b l e t a i l o r , and s e v e r a l of them i n the same community could s a t i s f a c t o r i l y provide the c l o t h i n g requirements of that community. They too had farms and f a m i l i e s and these f a c t o r s , as much as anything e l s e , influenced, t h e i r working a c t i v i t i e s . A f a m i l y ' s income and s e c u r i t y was the sum of a l l i t s component occupational f u n c t i o n s banded i n t o a s i n g l e labor-economic u n i t w i t h i n the community. At the base of t h i s i n d i v i d u a l f a m i l y economy was the subsistence farm. A man might s t y l e himself \" t a i l o r \" or \"weaver,\" but i n a g r i c u l t u r a l Massachusetts that d e s i g n a t i o n merely depicted h i s p r i n c i p a l c o n t r i b u t i o n to the common economy of the town. His l a b o r , i n terms of i t s t o t a l a p p l i c a t i o n was much more v a r i e d and i t s - end purpose was much more than the production of a s i n g l e commodity. Butchers, bakers, brewers and coopers were not found i n any q u a n t i t y i n r u r a l Massachusetts. Meat, hi d e s , bread, beer and c o n t a i n e r s were high volume s t a p l e s i n the r u r a l town. But the a r t i s a n - f a r m e r u s u a l l y k i l l e d h i s own l i v e s t o c k or had i t done f o r him by another farmer. Bread was baked i n the i n d i v i d u a l farmhouse and most men brewed l i m i t e d amounts of beer f o r personal use. Casks and b a r r e l s f o r the storage of p r o v i s i o n s or f o r the shipment of surplus g r a i n , f l o u r and meat, were made by the v e r s a t i l e carpenter. Of course some men were more e f f i c i e n t or had more f r e e time f o r the k i l l i n g of animals and the s t r i p p i n g of h i d e s ; and some men d i d make more and b e t t e r beer than others. A few towns, i n some r e g i o n s , exported s u f f i c i e n t produce to r e q u i r e the s e r v i c e s of a cooper. But by and l a r g e there was no place i n the a g r i c u l t u r a l towns f o r these and many other c r a f t occupations. Apart from the s e v e r a l b a s i c v o c a t i o n a l s k i l l s demanded by simple a g r a r i a n s o c i e t y , most s p e c i a l i z e d c r a f t s belonged i n the commercial towns of the seaboard. But there were exceptions to t h i s general r u l e . Some towns d i d c o n t a i n a \"staymaker,\" or \"barber,\" \"wig maker,\" \" b r a z i e r , \" \"wheel-w r i g h t , \" \"chairmaker,\" \" s a d d l e r , \" \" g l o v e r \" and so on. But those instances of occupational s p e c i a l i z a t i o n were unusual and most of these c r a f t s designations were given as s p e c i a l t y v a r i a n t s of a more c e n t r a l trade. The s k i l l e d worker i n the r u r a l town possessed two things of note: h i s v o c a t i o n a l a p t i t u d e and h i s land. The degree to which he spent h i s time w i t h e i t h e r of these was v a r i a b l e , but both demanded h i s c o n s i d e r a t i o n and a t t e n t i o n - While the r u r a l a r t i s a n was p r i n c i p a l l y occupied w i t h farming and the p r o s e c u t i o n of h i s c r a f t , he showed no a v e r s i o n to extending h i s l a b o r , at times as a menial, to a v a r i e t y of tasks which arose from personal or community o b l i g a t i o n . He was head of a f a m i l y but not i t s s o l e economic mainstay. The f a m i l y c o n t r i b u t e d to i t s own w e l f a r e as a u n i t and not as a c o l l e c t i o n of s i n g l e i n d i v i d u a l s ; i t was not a dependency. The r u r a l a r t i s a n was most l i k e l y a b l a c k s m i t h , carpenter, shoemaker, weaver, c l o t h i e r or leatherworker of some s o r t , or a tradesman d i r e c t l y connected ..with those c r a f t s . Above a l l he was an independent worker. Not only d i d he have c o n t r o l over the d i s p o s a l of h i s l a b o r , but he was f l e x i b l e and t a l e n t e d enough to govern h i s household economy and important and u s e f u l enough to a f f e c t the economic s t a t u s and behavior of h i s community. At the same time, he was subject to the v o c a t i o n a l needs of the community, the vagaries of c l i m a t e , weather and s o i l , and rhythmic i n f l u e n c e s of seasons. 101 I t i s p o i n t l e s s to d i s c u s s which of h i s possessions, h i s c r a f t or h i s l a n d , was most c r u c i a l to h i s w e l f a r e ; or the extent to which he was dependent on or independent from the i n f l u e n c e s of the general community. A l l were p a r t s of the continuous and p e r s i s t e n t p a t t e r n of settlement and residence, c i v i l o r g a n i z a t i o n , s o c i a l t r a d i t i o n , c u l t u r a l preference and a g r a r i a n economy. To f u n c t i o n i n t h i s s o c i e t y , d o m e s t i c a l l y , s o c i a l l y and economically, the m a j o r i t y of s k i l l e d workers;, found that the v o c a t i o n a l d u a l i t y of farming and c r a f t s was the most s u i t a b l e p r a c t i c e . At l e a s t to the end of the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , no major demographic, economic, p o l i t i c a l or t e c h n o l o g i c a l i n n o v a t i o n i n t e r r u p t e d the f i x e d but dual r o l e of the s k i l l e d worker i n the a g r i c u l t u r a l towns of Massachusetts. 102 NOTES CHAPTER I I I J.A. Henretta, \" F a m i l i e s and Farms: M e n t a l i t e i n Pre-I n d u s t r i a l America,\" WMQ 35 (1978), p. 19. ZHenry W. Belknap, Trades and Tradesmen i n Essex County (Salem: 1929), p. 96; M. Arch. MSS, \"Muster R o l l s f o r the Crown P o i n t E x p e d i t i o n , 1756,\" i n V o l . 94, pp. 167-557. Belknap l i s t s over 500 men and records 118 d i f f e r e n t trades. The muster r o l l s c o n t a i n the names and occupations of 2,544 men. Among the s k i l l e d occupations (over h a l f of the t o t a l ) over 80% were i n woodwork, metalwork and l e a t h e r trades. From a sample .of 193 names on the L756 muster Occupation Given No. % Laborer-husbandman* 95 49.2 Wood c r a f t s 23 11.9 Leather c r a f t s 22 11.4 Metal c r a f t s 21 10.9 C l o t h c r a f t s 15 7.8 Others 17 8.8 \"See Chapter IV. 3M. Arch. MSS., V o l s . 39-44, \" J u d i c i a r y \" ; V o l . 59,\"Manufactures\"; V o l . 71, \" M i l i t a r y \" ; V o l s . 244-254, \"Accounts.\" These volumes c o n t a i n hundreds of work c o n t r a c t s , d e s c r i p t i o n s of working c o n d i t i o n s and standards of work, p r i c e s wages and l e g a l l y r e q u i r e d q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of a r t i s a n s . 4M. Arch. MSS., V o l . 1, \" A g r i c u l t u r e \" ; V o l s . 112-117, \"Towns\"; V o l s . 130-134, \"Valuations of Towns\"; and \" B i o g r a p h i c a l Index'.' Land ownership and trades occupations were sampled and matched f o r over 200 a r t i s a n s . ^Baker MSS. Catalogue numbers 403, 446, 641 and 871 c o n t a i n over f i f t y sets of p r i v a t e papers showing a r t i s a n ' s sons being apprenticed. For f u r t h e r s t a t i s t i c s and d i s c u s s i o n , see Robert F. Seybolt, A p p r e n t i c e - ship and Apprenticeship T r a i n i n g i n C o l o n i a l New England and New York (New York: 1917). W.H. Whitmore, compiler, The C o l o n i a l Laws of Massachusetts (Boston: 1889), pp. 26-28; Acts and Resolves, V o l . I , pp. 64 f f . For 103 an example of a standard a p p r e n t i c e s h i p indenture form w i t h notes on o b l i g a t i o n s , expectations and purposes, see Edward Stephens, R e l i e f of Apprentices Wronged by t h e i r Masters (London: 1687) ( i n use i n P r o v i n -c i a l Massachusetts). See a l s o MHS Misc. Bd. MSS f o r A p r i l 1725. ^Seybolt, A p p r e n t i c e s h i p; U.S. Bureau of A p p r e n t i c e s h i p , \"Apprenticeship T r a i n i n g Since C o l o n i a l Days\" (Washington: 1950); P h i l i p Greven J r . , Four Generations: P o p u l a t i o n Land and Family i n C o l o n i a l Andover, Massachusetts ( I t h a c a , N.Y.: 1970). Edmund Morgan, The P u r i t a n Family (New York: 1944, 1966); J.A. Henretta, The E v o l u t i o n of American S o c i e t y , 1700-1815 (Toronto: 1973), pp. 9-15. Greven, Four Generations. On marriage age and f a m i l y s i z e , see D a n i e l Scott Smith, \"The Demographic H i s t o r y of C o l o n i a l New England,\" 32 (1972), p. 177. 9 For examples of mid-eighteenth century land l e a s e s , legacy arrangements, and the f r e s h c u l t i v a t i o n of ol d e r s e t t l e d l a n d , see: M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 11, \" A g r i c u l t u r e \" ; V o l . 43 \" J u d i c i c a l , \" pp. 449-51; V o l . 44, \" J u d i c a l , \" p. 46 f f and passim. For S u f f o l k County Deeds and Probate Court land h o l d i n g and i n h e r i t a n c e t r a n s a c t i o n s regarding a r t i s a n s i n S u f f o l k County, see MHS \"Thwing Catalogue.\" See a l s o Manfred Jonas, \"The W i l l s of the E a r l y S e t t l e r s of Essex County,\" EIHC 96 (1960), pp. 228-35; R.A. Gross, The Minutemen and Thei r World (New York: 1976), Chapter 4; R.R. Walcott, \"Husbandry i n C o l o n i a l New England,\" NEC; 9 (1936), pp. 218-52; P.W. B i d w e l l and J . Falconer, H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e i n the Northern United S t a t e s , 1620-1860 (Washington: 1925), pp. 49-58, 115; Kenneth Lo c k r i d g e , \"Land, P o p u l a t i o n and the E v o l u t i o n of New England S o c i e t y 1630-1790:. and an Aftert h o u g h t \" i n S. Kat z , ed,, C o l o n i a l America (Boston: 1971), pp. 466-91. 1 0 B a k e r MSS, 871 C443, \"Account Book of N a t h a n i e l Chamberlin, 1743-75\"' 641A214, \"Jacob Adams Account Book (n.p.) 1673-93\"; 641 r 3 2 4 , \"John Reed Account Book, 1740-1818 (n.p.).\" Blanche Hazard, \"Jacob Adams Shoemaking Accounts,\" B u l l e t i n of the Business H i s t o r y S o c i e t y 9 (1935), No. 6, pp. 86-92. For a sample of b a r t e r exchange among r u r a l a r t i s a n s see Appendix I . 11 J.R. Commons, et a l . , H i s t o r y of Labor i n the United States V o l . I (New York: 1918), David J . Saposs. S e c t i o n , pp. 25-168, Baker MSS 871 A 616, \"Blacksmith's Ledger, 1703-28,(n.p.); Account Book of N a t h a n i e l Chamberlin.\" 104 13 \"Account Book of N a t h a n i e l Chamberlin, 1743-1775\"; R o l l a Tryon, Household Manufactures i n the United S t a t e s , 1640-1860 (Chicago: 1917), Chapter 2. 14 \"Account Book of Na t h a n i e l Chamberlin\"; \"Jacob Adams Account Book\"; A l i c e E a r l e , Home L i f e i n C o l o n i a l Days (Stockbridge, Mass.: 1898), pp. 1-32, 252-280. \"'\"''\"Account Book of N a t h a n i e l Chamberlin,\" pp. 44-64. 16 Marcus Jernegan, Laboring and Dependent Classes i n C o l o n i a l America (Chicago: 1931), pp. 45-56; J.T. Main, The S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e of Revolutionary America ( P r i n c e t o n : 1965), pp. 21, 30; Abbot Smith, C o l o n i s t s i n Bondage (New York: 1947), pp. 4, 28-29. 1 7MHS MSS, \"Roxbury V a l u a t i o n s , 1727'.'; M. Arch. MSS V o l . 130, \"Valuations of Towns\"; B i d w e l l and Falconer, H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 20-40; J.T. Main, S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e of Revolutionary America ( P r i n c e t o n : 1965), pp. 7-43. 18 J.A. Henretta, \" F a m i l i e s and Farms: M e n t a l i t e i n Pre-I n d u s t r i a l America,\" WMQ_ 35 (1978), pp. 3-32. 19 Bruno Foreman, \"Salem Tradesmen and Craftsmen c 1762,\" EIHC 107 (1971), pp. 62-82, notes that i n mid-18th century Salem, a commer-c i a l town w i t h l i m i t e d a v a i l a b l e farm property, over 50% of l o c a l a r t i s a n s decreed farm property i n t h e i r e s t a t e s . I n more a g r i c u l t u r a l towns, the percentage r i s e s to as much as 95%. See Watertown Records 1634-1829; D.G. H i l l , Dedham Records 1635-1845; M.F. P i e r c e , ed., Town of Weston Records; S.A. Bates, ed., B r a i n t r e e Records 1640-1793. A l l passim. Copies of a l l at MHS. For 17th century examples of land accumulation by a r t i s a n s , see Jonas, \"The W i l l s of E a r l y S e t t l e r s . 1 20 This e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l aspect of the r u r a l a r t i s a n can be found i n t h e i r accounts. For blacksmiths see \"Account Book of Nathan-i e l Chamberlin\"; \"Blacksmiths Ledger.\" For carpenters see Baker MSS 446P361, \"Pearson Family Account Books,\" V o l . 2. For b r i c k l a y e r s and masons see MHS MSS, \"John M a r s h a l l D i a r y 1688-1711.\" For weavers and t a i l o r s see Baker MSS I B 291, \" B a r t l e t t Accounts, 1704-1760,\" V o l . 1; B a g n a l l , T e x t i l e I n d u s t r i e s , pp. 1-27; A.H. Cole, The American Wool Manufacture (New York: 1926), V o l . 1, Chapters 1-4. For shoe-makers see \"Adams Accounts,\" \"Reed Accounts\" and Baker MSS \"John Baker Accounts\", Baker MSS, \"V.S. C l a r k Notes,\" Box 2. 105 21 V.S. C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufacturing In the United S t a t e s , 1607-1860 (Washington: 1929), pp. 87-88. Saposs, H i s t o r y of Labor, pp. 160-68. 22 \"Jacob Adams Account Book\"; \"Account Book of John Reed\"; Blanche Hazard, The Orga n i z a t i o n of the Boot and Shoe Industry i n Massachusetts Before 1875 (Cambridge, Mass.: 1921), Chapter 1. 23 I b i d . 24 Jacobs Adams, wh i l e s e r v i n g as the S u f f i e l d , Hamps. Co. r e p r e s e n t a t i v e to the General Court from 1711-17 and i n h i s l a t e f i f t i e s , was s t i l l making shoes f o r neighbors who repayed by \" p u l l i n g f l a x , \" \"work i n f i e l d s , \" \" c a r t i n g stones,\" e t c . See \" T r a n s c r i p t i o n and biography\" ( t y p e s c r i p t ) i n \"Jacob Adams Account Book.\" 25 \"John Baker Accounts\"; Account Books of \"Jacob Adams\"and \"John Reed.\" 82. 26 \"V.S. C l a r k Papers,\" Box 2; C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufactures, 27 U.S. Bureau of Labor S t a t i s t i c s , \" H i s t o r y of Wages,\" B u l l e t i n No. 604 (1934); \"Wages i n the C o l o n i a l P e r i o d , \" B u l l e t i n No. 499 (1929); MHS MSS \" E z e k i a l P r i c e Papers, 1754-85,\" Sheets 199-322 contains d e t a i l e d r e l a t i v e l a b o r - m a t e r i a l c o s t s f o r t e x t i l e weaving. MHS MSS \"Joseph Belknap Ledger, 1748-85,\" V o l . 7 gives r a t i o s f o r l e a t h e r tanning, c u r i n g and l e a t h e r goods manufacture. Baker MSS 451 M 358 \"Edward Marrett Daybooks and Invoice Books\" and Baker MSS 451 R 281 \"Daniel Rea Daybooks and Ledgers\" give l a b o r and m a t e r i a l values f o r t a i l o r i n g . See \"Account Book of N a t h a n i e l Chamberlin\" f o r the comparable r a t i o s f o r metalwork. 28 \"V.S. C l a r k Papers,\" Box 2. Book.\" 29 \"John Reed Account Book.\" See a l s o \"Jacob Adams Account 30 See Appendix I. Acts and Resolves, V o l . I , pp. 92, 214, 413, 484. 32 For an e x c e l l e n t example of the economic c o n d i t i o n s of r u r a l m i n i s t e r s see MHS MSS, \" L e t t e r f o r N. E l l i s , March 31, 1736\" i n \"Cushing Papers.\" The best o v e r a l l source f o r the economic and p r o p r i e t a r y a c t i v i t i e s of c o l o n i a l Massachusetts m i n i s t e r s i s C l i f f o r d K. Shipton, S i b l e y ' s Harvard Graduates 17 V o l s . (Boston: 1873-1975). 33 See Appendix I I . 3 A \"John P o r t e r Accounts\" and \"Samuel P r a t t Accounts\" i n \"John Reed Account Book.\" See Appendix I . 35 I b i d . ; Baker MSS 77 S 419 \"Bayes Manchester Account Book, 1708-1729\"; Baker MSS 871C 985 \"Pyam Cushing Account Books,\" 2 V o l s . 60-68. V o l . 1. 3 6 For example, \"Nathaniel Chamberlin Account Book,\" pp. 50, 3 7 Baker MSS 446P361, \"Pearson Family Account Books,\" 2 Vols, 38 The Town and Country B u i l d e r s A s s i s t a n t (Boston: 1786); Joseph Moxon, Mechanick E x e r c i s e s . . . a p p l i e d to . . . smithing, j o i n e r y , carpentry, t u r n i n g , b r i c k l a y e r y (London: 1703). Copy at Kress L i b r a r y , Harvard; Belknap, Trades and Tradesmen; C a r l B r i d e n -baugh, C o l o n i a l Craftsmen (New York: 1950). MHS Misc. Bd. MSS Dec. 25, 1736, \" C o n s t r u c t i o n Contract of John White.\" A great many examples of carpenter v e r s a t i l i t y can be found i n MHS Misc. Bd. MSS, 1700-1760, passim. 39 See above, notes 20 and 25. 40 \"Pearson Family Account Books,\" V o l . 2. A l s o , M. Arch. MSS V o l . 59, pp. 391-4, \"Gunter Contract.\" For v o l u n t a r y short term s e r v i t u d e i n r u r a l p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts see MHS Misc. Bd. MSS A p r i l 21, 1726 and March 2, 1749. 41 \" C o n s t r u c t i o n Contract of John White\"; MHS M i s c . Bd. MSS \" L e t t e r from John Cotman,\" August 23, 1745. 42 Whitmore, C o l o n i a l Laws, pp. 88-90; Acts and Resolves, V o l . I , pp. 312-14 f f . For o r g a n i z a t i o n s of a r t i s a n s i n Boston, see Mary Roys Baker, \"Anglo-Massachusetts Trade Union Roots, 1130-1790,\" i n Labor H i s t o r y 14 (1973), pp. 352-96. 107 43 \"Jacob Adams Account Book\"; Sappos, I n d u s t r i a l S o c i e t y. 44 Hazard, Boot and Shoe Industry, Chapter 1. 4 5\"V.S. C l a r k Notes,\" Box 2. 46 C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufactures, pp. 151-2. 47 E a r l e , Home L i f e , Chapters 7-8; W.R. B a g n a l l , T e x t i l e I n d u s t r i e s of the United S t a t e s , Chapter 1. 48 Bruno Foreman, \"The Account Book of John Gould, Weaver, 1697-1724,\" EIHC 105 (1969), pp. 36-49. A.L. Cummings, Ru r a l Household I n v e n t o r i e s (Boston: 1964), a s s e r t s the u n i v e r s a l i t y of home spinning. 49 Bag n a l l , T e x t i l e I n d u s t r i e s , Chapter 1. On l e a t h e r c l o t h i n g use and manufacture see \"Joseph Belknap Ledger,\" V o l . 7; Baker MSS 403 N 751, \"Mathew Noble Ledger, 1766.\" 5 0 B a k e r MSS 1 B 291, V o l . 1, \" B a r t l e t t Accounts, 1704-1760.\" Three generations of B a r t l e t t s were combination farmers-weavers-t a i l o r s . Although they emphasized weaving as t h e i r c h i e f a l t e r n a t i v e to farming, i n some years t h e i r t a i l o r i n g accounts exceeded the value of weaving. 5 1 B a k e r MSS 44 W 948, \"Ebenezer Wright Account Book, 1710-90.\" 52 C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufactures, p. 160; E a r l e , Home L i f e , Chapter 4. For the technology of t e x t i l e p roduction and i t s s t a t u s i n eighteenth century England, see S.D, Chapman, \"The T e x t i l e Factory before Arkwright: A Typology of Factory Development.\" Bus. H i s t . Rev. 48 (1974), pp. 451-78. \" E z e k i e l P r i c e Papers,\" Sheets 311-12. The p r i c e of an imported, p a r t l y mechanized English-made hand loom would have cost Wright (note 51) the equivalent of f i v e years rent of f i v e acres of ara b l e land. Most looms at work i n r u r a l communities were made l o c a l l y or i n Boston. On land costs see J.T. Main, S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e , pp. 166-76. 108 J 4 S e e records of The S o c i e t y f o r Encouraging Industry and Employing the Poor i n \" E z e k i a l P r i c e Papers.\" \" ^ I b i d . To produce 1,000 yards of loomed coarse l i n e n i n a year would have r e q u i r e d the t o t a l yarn produced annually by ten f u l l - t i m e spinners. The \" E z e k i a l P r i c e Papers\" i s perhaps the best source f o r spinning and weaving technology, methods and production f i g u r e s i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts, Sheets 199-322 c o n t a i n c a l c u l a t i o n s , estimates and examples of contemporary c l o t h production. CHAPTER IV HUSBANDMEN AND LABORERS A r t i s a n s represented the s k i l l e d , t r a i n e d v o c a t i o n a l backbone of the r u r a l economy. But not a l l men were s k i l l e d i n terms of possessing s p e c i a l t r a i n i n g , and those who were not c o n s t i t u t e d the l a r g e s t p l u r a l i t y of r u r a l workers. These were the husbandmen and la b o r e r s of the a g r i c u l t u r a l towns. And i f the a r t i s a n s can be judged \" s k i l l e d \" i n reference to c r a f t s acumen and occu p a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e , the husbandmen and l a b o r e r s of t h i s s o c i e t y were \" u n s k i l l e d \" by simple reason of not having learned a manual trade or c r a f t . Yet the word' \" u n s k i l l e d \" had no common contemporary usage. The words most f r e q u e n t l y used to d e f i n e the working status of men were \"mechanic,\" \" a r t i s a n , \" \"handi-craftsman,\" \" l a b o r e r \" and \"husbandman.\" A \"mechanic\" was simply anyone, t r a i n e d or not, who worked w i t h h i s hands i n a non-a g r i c u l t u r a l occupation. The a r t i s a n s and handicraftsmen were those who possessed a s p e c i a l , l e g a l i n d u s t r i a l ( i . e . , n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l ) s k i l l . While i t was acknowledged that a learned s k i l l was an advantage to the i n d i v i d u a l and the community, there was f e l t to be no ser i o u s disadvantage i n not possessing a s k i l l e d c r a f t . A \" h a b i t of work\" was more important i n t h i s s o c i e t y than p a r t i c u l a r work c r e d e n t i a l s , and only c h i l d r e n were deemed to be \" u n s k i l l e d . \" Anyone who worked d i l i g e n t l y and r e g u l a r l y at any occupation was considered to possess c e r t a i n l a b o r i n g a t t r i b u t e s that went beyond ca t e g o r i e s of q u a l i f i c a t i o n s . ^ 109 110 Yet the community d i d i n s i s t on the use of an occ u p a t i o n a l s u f f i x i n l e g a l and formal matters. The terms \" a r t i s a n , \" \"mechanic\" or \"handicraftsman\" were seldom used i n i n d i v i d u a l cases but were a p p l i e d to groups or as c o l l e c t i v e g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s . Occupational designations f e l l i n t o s e v e r a l d i s t i n c t forms of i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and d e f i n i t i o n . On the one hand, i f a worker possessed and p r a c t i c e d an apprenticed c r a f t , the p a r t i c u l a r trade was given; hence the appendages \"carpenter,\" \"weaver,\" \"cordwainer,\" \"tanner\" and so on. The word \"merchant\" was very broad i n i t s meaning and included some s t o r e -keepers as w e l l as wealthy i n t e r n a t i o n a l t r a d e r s and businessmen. Some sen i o r and wealthy businessmen, along w i t h many p r o f e s s i o n a l s , j u s t i c e s and p o l i t i c i a n s were known as \" e s q u i r e \" or \"gentleman.\" For those p e t t y businessmen who had not yet achieved s u f f i c i e n t prominance f o r the d e s i g n a t i o n \"merchant,\" s u f f i x e s such as \" r e t a i l e r s , \" 2 \"taverner\" or \" d i s t i l l e r \" were used. The system, i f such i t was, had s o c i a l meaning as w e l l as l e g a l purpose, and i t was f l e x i b l e . A man's s t a t i o n i n the s o c i a l and economic order was subject to change over time and according to circumstance. In Boston and elsewhere i n the province's commercial economy, a man might change h i s occupational status s e v e r a l times i n h i s l i f e t i m e i f he progressed from \" l a b o r e r \" through a c r a f t or c r a f t s to entrepreneur, merchant or businessman. This form of voca-t i o n a l and s o c i a l m o b i l i t y was common i n eighteenth century Boston. In a d d i t i o n , a man might have adjusted h i s occupational s t a t u s from I l l year to year or season to season. A mariner, f o r example, who spent part of h i s year ashore could be a l t e r n a t i v e l y a \"seaman,\" and a \" c a r t e r \" or \" l a b o r e r . \" S a i l o r s were u s u a l l y termed \"mariners\" whether they were common seamen or ship's o f f i c e r s ; indeed many ship owners were a l s o r e f e r r e d to as \"mariners.\" In the s p e c i a l i z e d work envi r o n -ment of Boston, a blacksmith might a l t e r n a t i v e l y be a b r a z i e r , and a carpenter a blockmaker, or a barber-wigmaker a d e n t i s t , i f s u b - s p e c i a l t i e s were inv o l v e d i n the i n d i v i d u a l ' s c r a f t , and t h i s s p e c i a l i z a t i o n d i f f e r e d from that of the r u r a l a r t i s a n . The Boston carpenter, f o r example, o f t e n abandoned general carpentry to s p e c i a l i z e e x c l u s i v e l y i n a 3 p a r t i c u l a r branch of the trade. In a g r i c u l t u r a l Massachusetts, v o c a t i o n a l d e s i g n a t i o n s were more fundamental and s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d . In s p i t e of the pragmatic and f l u i d q u a l i t y of work i n the r u r a l communities, men u s u a l l y held a s i n g l e o c cupational t i t l e f o r the d u r a t i o n of t h e i r working l i v e s . The n e a r - u n i v e r s a l a l t e r n a t i v e of farming minimized extensive v o c a t i o n a l change. O c c a s i o n a l l y , i f workers, s k i l l e d or otherwise, rose i n s o c i a l , economic or p o l i t i c a l s t a t u s the occupational s u f f i x might be dropped and replaced by \" e s q u i r e \" or \"gentleman.\" But o f t e n , when the rank perhaps i n v i t e d the use of \"gentleman,\" the r u r a l c e l e b r i t y continued to use h i s o l d occupational t i t l e . One man, f o r example, a shoemaker, became a s u c c e s s f u l commercial farmer and prominant landowner and a member of the General Court and was r e f e r r e d to as \"gentleman\" i n Boston; but i n h i s l o c a l r u r a l community he remained a \"shoemaker\" i n the tax and assessment r o l l s . 4 The terms \"farmer\" 112 and \"yeoman\" commonly a p p l i e d to those who not only farmed f u l l time but who employed others i n t h e i r operations and produced marketable a g r i c u l t u r a l surplus.\"' But the most common occ u p a t i o n a l d e s i g n a t i o n s i n r u r a l Massachusetts were those of \"husbandman\" and \" l a b o r e r . \" These l a t t e r named were not u n s k i l l e d i n any meaningful way. For, w h i l e a great d e a l of the work these men d i d was manual r a t h e r than t e c h n i c a l or s t u d i e d , they were re q u i r e d to possess a cons i d e r a b l e degree of knowledge and experience of a l l f a c e t s of a g r i c u l t u r a l work. Moreover, they performed many other tasks i n the community that f e l l o u t s i d e wholly a g r i c u l t u r a l employment but which d i d not demand s p e c i a l t r a i n i n g . Their work was a combination of p h y s i c a l l a b o r , a g r i c u l t u r a l e x p e r t i s e and a s s i s t a n c e and support to the more r e f i n e d f u n c t i o n s of the craftsman. For t h e i r own personal economies, these husbandmen and l a b o r e r s were n e c e s s a r i l y v e r s a t i l e i n an i n f o r m a l manner. Many were adept i n tanning l e a t h e r , weaving, rough carpentry and the many other tasks that arose and were part of the operation of a farm. To r e f e r to them as \" u n s k i l l e d \" i s to d i s t i n g u i s h them from a r t i s a n s and to seek c l a r i t y i n i d e n t i f y i n g a s i g n i f i c a n t body of r e s i d e n t workers i n r u r a l s o c i e t y . The un-s k i l l e d workers of r u r a l p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts were those who had no formal, l e g a l i z e d a p prenticeship t r a i n i n g , no matter what t h e i r occupations might be. As such they represented a v o c a t i o n a l constituency that d i f f e r e d i n many ways from the r u r a l a r t i s a n s . As part of the same community and economy, t h e i r c o l l e c t i v e s t a t u s 113 was subject to the same laws of s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y , interdependency and communal usefulness. But t h e i r v o c a t i o n a l d i s t i n c t i v e n e s s was r e f l e c t e d i n other s o c i a l and economic p a r t i c u l a r s . In the p r o v i n c i a l s o c i a l order and mind, i f not i n i t s l e x i c o n , \" s k i l l e d \" and \" u n s k i l l e d \" d i d have some d e f i n i t i o n . ^ The a p p r e n t i c e s h i p system that had excluded the province's husbandmen and l a b o r e r s operated on a set of e s t a b l i s h e d r u l e s and c i r c u m s t a n t i a l determinants. F i r s t , the p o p u l a t i o n grew at a h i g h and f a i r l y constant r a t e . From 1690 to 1760 the p r o v i n c i a l p o p u l a t i o n increased by some 350%, at an average decennial r a t e of s l i g h t l y more than 24%; i n one e x t r a o r d i n a r y decade, 1710-1720, the g growth r a t e was 45.8%. Thus, w i t h a minimum of per c a p i t a economic growth, or even d e c l i n e , and given the r e l a t i v e l y s t a b l e nature of l o c a l economic and labor p r a c t i c e s , the s k i l l e d occupations would r e q u i r e a d d i t i o n s and a replacement f a c t o r roughly equal to p o p u l a t i o n Q i n c r e a s e . The p o l i c i e s and s t r i c t enforcement a c t i o n s of v a r i o u s p r o v i n c i a l l e g a l a u t h o r i t i e s l i m i t e d the i n f l u e n c e of immigration on growth. The formal c o n t r o l of immigration and of i n t r a - p r o v i n c i a l t r a n s i e n c y meant that towns grew more from i n t e r n a l demographic f a c t o r s than from e x t e r n a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s . \" ^ Even the c r e a t i o n of new towns was more a r e s u l t of indigenous p r o v i n c i a l p o p u l a t i o n growth than of a r e g u l a r i n f l u x of immigrants. I t has been noted that the economic c o n f i g u r a t i o n s of towns and the behavior of workers and f a m i l i e s precluded a high incidence of f u l l - t i m e c r a f t s occupation. This f u r t h e r s t a b i l i z e d the l o c a l demand f o r t r a i n e d a r t i s a n s . The f i g u r e s are d i f f i c u l t to o b t a i n , but even i f 40% of r u r a l a d u l t males p r a c t i c e d an occupational s k i l l , i n v a r y i n g degrees of a c t i v i t y , not a l l of these a r t i s a n s would simultaneously need an apprentice. And i f fewer than 40% of males were being apprenticed, the remainder were l e f t to a l i m i t e d number and choice of a l t e r n a t i v e s . For some, apprenticeship was simply delayed, u n t i l the l o c a l need f o r craftsmen was balanced against l o c a l growth and the i n e v i t a b l e replacement of o l d e r a r t i s a n s . For most, however, c r a f t s t r a i n i n g was never a c o n s i d e r a t i o n . The sons of l o c a l merchants and p r o f e s s i o n a l s normally followed i n t h e i r f a t h e r s ' paths; some of these sons i n h e r i t e d enough land at an e a r l y age to be unconcerned w i t h an a l t e r n a t i v e work s k i l l . Future v o c a t i o n a l status was u s u a l l y determined at an e a r l y stage of youth, f r e q u e n t l y as soon as a boy's eleventh or t w e l f t h year. At that time, the economic means, needs and v o c a t i o n a l s t a t u s of the f a t h e r were brought to bear on a son's f u t u r e . The requirements of the town's p r a c t i c i n g a r t i s a n s and the subject boy's i n t e l l i g e n c e , a p t i t u d e and n a t i v e a b i l i t i e s a l l c o n t r i b u t e d to h i s l a t e r o c c u p a t i o n a l r o l e . For the sons of the province's husbandmen and l a b o r e r s , the o p p o r t u n i t i e s to acquire apprenticed s k i l l s were q u i t e circumscribed. C e r t a i n l y , the m a j o r i t y of a r t i s a n s ensured that t h e i r own sons were given preference i n trades t r a i n i n g and much of the turnover i n a r t i s a n s was accomplished t h i s way. Often, q u i t e simply, a r u r a l l a b o r e r could not a f f o r d to l o s e a son's c o n t r i b u t i o n to the household economy or 115 meet the fees or o b l i g a t i o n s of indentured a p p r e n t i c e s h i p . So, f o r a m a j o r i t y of the sons of the u n s k i l l e d , there was no s u b s t i t u t e to t h e i r f a t h e r s ' s t a t u s . The sons of some saw-and g r i s t - m i l l o p e r a tors, or those whose f a t h e r s owned marketable wood, ore, c o a l or s a l t d e p o s i t s , d i d have access to careers as a l t e r n a t i v e s to e i t h e r a p p r e n t i c e s h i p or farm l a b o r i n g . But f o r most, the f u t u r e l a y i n owning a small piece of c u l t i v a t e d land and c o n t r i b u t i n g to the l o c a l economy as an u n s k i l l e d 12 or p a r t l y s k i l l e d worker. The best a v a i l a b l e estimate of the r a t i o of s k i l l e d to un-s k i l l e d f r e e workers i n r u r a l p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y i n d i c a t e s that about 40% of a l l a d u l t males possessed c r a f t s c r e d e n t i a l s . Approximately 45% were l i s t e d as \" l a b o r e r s \" or \"husbandmen,\" wh i l e the remaining 15% were merchants, m i l l operators, forge owners, k i l n owners, c a r t e r s and so on. P r o f e s s i o n a l s such as lawyers, teachers and m i n i s t e r s represented a small percentage of the l a t t e r f i g u r e . Of the t o t a l working 13 p o p u l a t i o n — f r e e and slave — l e s s than 10% were i n s e r v i t u d e . To speak of \" l a n d l e s s l a b o r e r s \" i n t h i s s o c i e t y would be, by and l a r g e , a f a l l a c y . A \" p o l l \" i n Massachusetts was any f r e e white male over the age of s i x t e e n years who was subject to l o c a l and p r o v i n c i a l tax assess-ment because he owned or leased property, worked f o r income or derived income from r e n t s , investments or other business. According to the p r o v i n c i a l \" v a l u a t i o n \" assessments, i n most years over 90% of a l l p o l l s were taxed. Nearly 80% of a l l p o l l s , i n a d d i t i o n to t h e i r l i s t e d occupations owned, leased or rented some c u l t i v a t e d land. There i s 116 nothing to i n d i c a t e that the 20% who d i d no farming were predominately \" l a b o r e r s . \" What can be e s t a b l i s h e d i s that l a b o r e r s and husbandmen g e n e r a l l y possessed fewer acres of farm land than d i d s k i l l e d workers, p r o f e s s i o n a l s , e s p e c i a l l y c l e r g y , most r u r a l merchants and entrepreneurs. Thus, s k i l l e d and u n s k i l l e d workers had a common i f unequal p r o p r i e t a r y i n t e r e s t i n the land. The s u c c e s s f u l a r t i s a n - f a r m e r occupied more farmland than, he could manage i n d i v i d u a l l y and e f f i c i e n t l y and h i s use of land was both p r a c t i c a l , as farmed subsistence, and reserved as 14 property c o l l a t e r a l and as legacy. The terms l a b o r e r and husbandman might imply separate and s p e c i f i c forms of u n s k i l l e d l a b o r . But they were used interchangeably i n the assessment r o l l s of r u r a l communities. The r u r a l l a b o r e r derived a major p o r t i o n of h i s l i v e l i h o o d from farm work, an a c t i v i t y synonymous w i t h the conventional meaning of \"husbandman.\" I f a d i s t i n c t i o n can be made, i t would be i n terms of land ownership and r e l a t i v e average acreages, and the r e l a t i v e amount of work performed on the i n d i v i d u a l ' s own property. \"Husbandmen,\" so c a l l e d i n o f f i c i a l tax r e c o r d s , sometimes farmed more of t h e i r own acreages than d i d \" l a b o r e r s . \" But the d i s t i n c t i o n was s l i g h t , u s u a l l y amounting to the d i f f e r e n c e between f i v e - and ten-acre h o l d i n g s , and was made more as a personal preference than as an o b j e c t i v e and p r a c t i c a l d e f i n i t i o n . I t i s of some importance, i n regard to s o c i a l context, that the t i t l e \" l a b o r e r \" was not t r e a t e d w i t h opprobrium but normally defined a s m a l l subsistence farmer who a l s o worked elsewhere i n the community i n non-117 a r t i s a n c a p a c i t i e s . The term \"husbandman\" was not ap p l i e d to some-one who farmed f u l l time e i t h e r only f o r himself or only f o r ot h e r s , but r e a l l y meant \"farmer\" and \"laborer.\"\"'\"\"' On the average, the u n s k i l l e d worker occupied fewer acres than d i d the ar t i s a n - f a r m e r . Yet i n most cases he farmed no l e s s than he and h i s f a m i l y could e f f e c t i v e l y manage. He was subject to the same a g r i c u l t u r a l f o r c e s that a f f e c t e d the a r t i s a n - f a r m e r : a short season and v a r i a b l e s e e d , s o i l , and weather c o n d i t i o n s , p r i m i t i v e implements and farming techniques, and problems of o r g a n i z i n g h i s own l a b o r . The common a g r i c u l t u r a l impediments were compounded f o r the l e s s a f f l u e n t laborer-farmer. U s u a l l y , he owned no oxen and h i s f a c i l i t i e s and equipment x^ere s m a l l e r , o l d e r and l e s s e f f i c i e n t . H i s f a m i l y was smaller as a r e s u l t of h i s more l i m i t e d economy and th e r e f o r e d i d not c o n t r i b u t e l a b o r on the sc a l e of the a r t i s a n ' s f a m i l y u n i t . His plow was n e c e s s a r i l y small and simple, to permit i n d i v i d u a l use, and even w i t h borrowed or h i r e d oxen, the seeding of more than two or three acres of t i l l a g e crops was a p r o h i b i t i v e task. The plow most commonly used i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts was the \"Carey Plow\" which has been noted by Percy B i d w e l l as having \"the l a n d - s i d e and standard made of wood [with] a wooden mould-board, o f t e n roughly p l a t e d over w i t h o l d pieces of . . . sheet i r o n . I t had a clumsy wrought i r o n share, w h i l e the handles were u p r i g h t , held i n place by two wooden p i n s . \" The p l a n t i n g and h a r v e s t i n g seasons — u s u a l l y three or four weeks i n April-May and September-October, r e s p e c t i v e l y — were too short to a l l o w f o r a p r o t r a c t e d or more l e i s u r e l y a p p l i c a t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l l a b o r . Often, the husbandman was o b l i g e d to a s s i s t a team or s i n g l e horse to p u l l h i s plow, using h i s w i f e , a son, daughter or neighbor to steady the implement. The subsequent weeding and t h i n n i n g of crops was accomplished w i t h a simple hoe and demanded long days of r e g u l a r and repeated stooped manual work. Harvesting meant even more intense and exhausting work, w i t h the t h r e a t of r a i n , f r o s t or premature crop ripeness adding urgency to the p h y s i c a l demands of reaping. Mean-w h i l e , haying and some l i v e s t o c k s u p e r v i s i o n , stone c l e a r i n g , f e n c i n g and other r e g u l a r maintenance work occupied the small farmer f o r much of the s i x months between e a r l y A p r i l and l a t e September-early October W r i t i n g i n the American Museum i n 1787, General Warren of Massachusett i n deprecating, the p r i m i t i v e n e s s of p r o v i n c i a l farming techniques, observed that even those husbandmen w i t h extensive acreages were constrained by the l a b o r and seasonal l i m i t a t i o n s of subsistence farming. On crop t i l l a g e he noted: \"one miserable team, a p a l t r y plow and everything i n the same p r o p o r t i o n ; three acres of Indian corn . . . as many acres of h a l f - s t a r v e d E n g l i s h g r a i n . . . and a small yard of t u r n i p s complete the t i l l a g e , and the whole i s conducted perhaps by a man and a boy and performed i n h a l f t h e i r time.\" L i k e the a r t i s a n - f a r m e r , the u n s k i l l e d laborer-farmer spent between 100 and 150 days a year tending to h i s own a g r i c u l t u r a l needs and o b l i g a t i o n s ; he was then l e f t w i t h an equal or greater number of working days — most of them i n winter — w i t h which to f i l l out h i s annual income. 119 L i k e the a r t i s a n - f a r m e r , the husbandman o f t e n r e q u i r e d a s s i s t a n c e on h i s own small acreage. Hence h i s deep involvement i n the b a r t e r and 16 labor-exchange economy of the l o c a l community. With no s i n g l e v i t a l s k i l l w i t h which to b a r t e r , the a g r i c u l t u r a l l a b o r e r proved most u s e f u l to the l o c a l economy by h i s p r o v i s i o n of manual l a b o r . He paid f o r h i s f a m i l y ' s shoes and c l o t h i n g not w i t h self-produced commodities or s p e c i a l v o c a t i o n a l e x p e r t i s e , but w i t h h i s v a r i e d l a b o r . The u n s k i l l e d subsistence farmer spent a great deal of h i s time weeding, haying and th r e s h i n g f o r a r t i s a n - f a r m e r s to whom he was indebted f o r household and farm supply goods and s e r v i c e s . He cut t r e e s , hauled wood, cl e a r e d stones from f i e l d s , b u i l t and r e p a i r e d fences and slaughtered and skinned l i v e s t o c k ; he supplemented and augmented h i s subsistence by s u b s t i t u t i n g f o r others on o b l i g a t o r y p u b l i c works such as road, d i t c h and bridge maintenance. He paid h i s taxes, t i t h e s and Meeting House fees and charges w i t h h i s l a b o r . O c c a s i o n a l l y he amassed a small surplus of work c r e d i t and could n e g o t i a t e w i t h others f o r labor a s s i s t a n c e on h i s small home l o t , i f necessary. In these and other ways the u n s k i l l e d worker's regimen was not u n l i k e that of any i n the community, i n the p r a c t i c a l use and exchange of h i s time and l a b o r . Of course, h i s work d i f f e r e d from the a r t i s a n ' s , i n kind and i n r e l a t i v e v a l u e . He spent a m a j o r i t y of h i s working l i f e , i n the work he d i d outside h i s own h o l d i n g , repaying debts i n c u r r e d f o r goods and s e r v i c e s p r e v i o u s l y extended to him. He d i f f e r e d from the r u r a l a r t i s a n i n that regard a l s o . In a way, the u n s k i l l e d laborer-farmer was as c l o s e as p o s s i b l e 120 to being \"employed.\" The s k i l l e d worker was \"engaged\" to perform a task or produce an item and was u s u a l l y \"owed\" f o r h i s work. The reverse was true i n the case of the u n s k i l l e d worker who, a f t e r arranging f o r h i s own and h i s f a m i l y ' s m a t e r i a l or s e r v i c e needs, found himself beholden to a c r e d i t o r who would t h e r e a f t e r supervise h i s l a b o r as repayment. In s h o r t , the s k i l l e d a r t i s a n , and e s p e c i a l l y the more s u c c e s s f u l of them, was more o f t e n a c r e d i t o r i n h i s accounting; the u n s k i l l e d l a b o r e r n e a r l y always owed l a b o r . But that l a b o r was c r u c i a l to l o c a l c o n d i t i o n s and i n many respects the place of the l a b o r e r was as v i t a l as any i n the economy of the r u r a l community. I t i s u n l i k e l y that more than 5% of a l l a d u l t white males i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts were long term indentured servants; and only about 3% of the t o t a l working pop u l a t i o n were negro s l a v e s . In f a c t , i n r u r a l Massachusetts the f i g u r e f o r sl a v e s never exceeded 2% during 19 the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d . In view of the absence of any c e n t r a l i z e d i n d u s t r i a l f a c i l i t i e s and the p a u c i t y of l a r g e - s c a l e commercial a g r i c u l t u r e , these f i g u r e s are not s u r p r i s i n g . There was no economic i n c e n t i v e or opportunity to employ l a r g e numbers of dependent u n s k i l l e d workers i n permanent wage-related employment. But the l o c a l small farm-and community-centred economies d i d r e q u i r e a permanent presence and r e g u l a r and r e l i a b l e supply of u n s k i l l e d l a b o r . Because of the o r i e n t a t i o n of the towns' economies, h i r e d u n s k i l l e d l a b o r was only p r a c t i c a b l e on a small and p e r s o n a l i z e d s c a l e . I t was needed and a p p l i e d i n much the same manner as was s k i l l e d l a b o r : b r i e f l y , exten-s i v e l y , by and f o r i n d i v i d u a l s , f o r personal and v a r i a b l e use. In r u r a l s o c i e t y there was occasion f o r and the p r a c t i c e of se r v i t u d e . Apprentices became de f a c t o servant-trainee-employees. Many daughters of l a b o r e r s and husbandmen found t h e i r way i n t o the homes of more a f f l u e n t men, as domestic servants to a r t i s a n s , merchants farmers, and business entrepreneurs. U n s k i l l e d workers sometimes indentured themselves as \"servants\" to-commercial farmers, a r t i s a n s and merchants. But apart from the normal four-to-seven year terms of r e s i d e n t i a l a p p r e n t i c e s h i p , these other arrangements were f o r b r i e f and temporary d u r a t i o n . The usual term of v o l u n t a r y s e r v i t u d e was 20 f o r s i x months or a year, w i t h some exceptions of up to two years. In the case of a g r i c u l t u r a l s e r v i t u d e , many l a r g e landowners leased f i v e , ten or more acres of ara b l e land to r u r a l l a b o r e r s on long term agreement, p r e f e r i n g t h i s method of land u t i l i z a t i o n and p r o f i t to d i r e c t term-employment of the a g r i c u l t u r a l l a b o r that would have been necessary f o r the owner's personal operation of the lan d . Lease payments, i n whatever form, were often.considered more a t t r a c t i v e than the p o t e n t i a l problems of the management and d i r e c t r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of 21 short-term r e s i d e n t servant l a b o r . Yet another form of l e g a l short-term v o l u n t a r y s e r v i t u d e e x i s t e d i n r u r a l p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts. Agreements of indenture were made f o r the purpose of r e t i r i n g s p e c i f i c debts. Many u n s k i l l e d workers owed annual l e a s e payments and r e t i r e d these o b l i g a t i o n s by 122 consenting to work e x c l u s i v e l y f o r the l e a s o r under terms and c o n d i t i o n s mutually agreeable. I f a l a b o r e r ' s debts to a l o c a l a r t i s a n were l a r g e enough, o f t e n f o r a year's supply of shoes or c l o t h i n g or b l a c k -smith's work, f o r example, the debtor would f o r m a l l y agree to an extended supply of farm labor equal to the value of the amount owed. Here, eighteenth century s e r v i t u d e acquires a unique meaning. For although the \"master\" i n these cases would have f u l l access to the labor of the c o n t r a c t i n g \"servant,\" the l a t t e r was sometimes permitted by a generous master to attend to h i s personal a g r i c u l t u r a l and domestic work and a f f a i r s as a p r i o r i t y . The terms and c o n d i t i o n s of s e r v i t u d e were r e l a x e d , f l e x i b l e and were customarily f o r s p e c i f i e d 22 and temporary purposes. Even ap p r e n t i c e s , who were, s t r i c t l y speaking, p r a c t i c a l s ervants, were not mere employees. C e r t a i n l y they were expected to c o n t r i b u t e to the economic advantage of: t h e i r masters i n r e t u r n f o r the transference of knowledge and c r a f t s e x p e r t i s e . But a p p r e n t i c e -ship a l s o was a complex of s o c i a l , moral and s c h o l a s t i c l e a r n i n g and the master was under.a r i g i d o b l i g a t i o n . t o guide the young ward through adolescence to manhood. This l e g a l l y mandated r e s p o n s i b i l i t y s t r e s s e d the i n c l u s i o n of the apprentice i n t o the h i e r a r c h y of the host f a m i l y u n i t , as an a c t i v e f a m i l y member. N a t u r a l l y the apprentice was a worker engaged by h i s artisan-master, but h i s s t a t u s extended beyond that of a servant-employee. Abuses of t h i s arrangement, such as masters using the apprentices' time i n excessive 123 f i e l d work to the detriment of shop work, f o r example, were c l o s e l y monitored by parents, neighbors and constables and reported and 23 corre c t e d by l o c a l a u t h o r i t i e s . With only a marginal servant c l a s s — one that was f l u i d and t r a n s i t o r y i n composition — and. w i t h an economy based on i n d i v i d u a l production and pragmatic working c o n d i t i o n s and r e l a t i o n s h i p s , r u r a l s o c i e t y ' s l a b o r needs were f i l l e d by workers who were independent, mobile and v e r s a t i l e . The i n d i v i d u a l u n s k i l l e d worker was incorporated i n t o the l o c a l economy as a f u l l p a r t i c i p a n t i n the community's s o c i a l and economic o r g a n i z a t i o n . The u n s k i l l e d worker i n r u r a l p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts occupied a novel p o s i t i o n w i t h i n s o c i e t y i n c o n t r a s t to some other l a b o r i n g c l a s s e s elsewhere i n the A t l a n t i c world and western Europe. The r u r a l l a b o r e r i n eighteenth century Massachusetts u s u a l l y 24 owned or had leasehold on the subsistence land he occupied. In Massachusetts the u n s k i l l e d r u r a l worker was not a member of a bonded, indentured servant c l a s s . He was not subject to the steady and perpetual d i c t a t e s of a master or s i n g l e employer, nor dependent upon the vagaries of manorial or g e n t r y - c o n t r o l l e d tenancy, nor of the dogmatic laws of cash crop, m e r c a n t i l e or manufacturing economies. He d i d not s u f f e r the economic, s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l p r o s c r i p t i o n s of l a n d l e s s farm.laborers i n England or the indentured 25 and post-indentured a g r i c u l t u r a l servants of the Chesapeake. In Massachusetts, because the r u r a l l a b o r e r u s u a l l y enjoyed church member-ship and held t i t l e to l a n d , he was o f t e n e l i g i b l e to vote on and p a r t i c i p a t e i n a wide range of issues that were common to the e n t i r e 124 community. He was above a l l , an i n t e g r a l and important independent l i n k i n the modest and l o c a l economies of a g r a r i a n and communal Massachusetts. And although h i s c h i e f source and means of independence, s t a b i l i t y and s e c u r i t y was h i s l a b o r and not a s p e c i a l s k i l l , or ownership of s u b s t a n t i a l disposable r e a l e s t a t e , he was r e l a t i v e l y f r e e to deploy h i s l a b o r , as much on h i s own terms as at the command or under the a u t h o r i t y of others. There can be no mistake that he was indebted o f t e n to merchants, a r t i s a n s and landowners and that h i s l a b o r was i n v a r i a b l y h i s only method of repayment of those debts. A r e g u l a r demand f o r farm help meant that the u n s k i l l e d worker was permitted and even encouraged to repay w i t h h i s l a b o r when time, the nature and importance of the work and the occasion f o r mutual convenience coalesced. In a l l matters i t was the possession of land that afforded 26 a measure of e q u a l i t y f o r the r u r a l l a b o r i n g p o p u l a t i o n . S t i l l , there were some d i s p a r i t i e s between s k i l l e d and u n s k i l l e d workers. A l a b o r e r ' s work was c o n s i s t e n t l y valued at n e a r l y 60% that of the a r t i s a n . Moreover, the l a t t e r normally farmed about 50% more 27 acreage than t h e . l a b o r e r . While t h i s gap was s i g n i f i c a n t , i t was not i n i t s e l f the main cause of economic and s o c i a l d i s t i n c t i o n between the two groups. Rather, i t was a symptom of the perpetuation of b a s i c advantages inherent i n c r a f t s v o c a t i o n s and the attendant property accumulations. The sons of a r t i s a n s were more l i k e l y to i n h e r i t more land at adulthood i n a d d i t i o n to the i n e v i t a b l e and more remunerative trades t r a i n i n g they would have r e c e i v e d . The 125 a r t i s a n - f a r m e r turned h i s higher earning power i n t o extended a g r i c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t y by b a r t e r i n g h i s s e r v i c e s f o r s u b s t i t u t e farm l a b o r . The added value of h i s c r a f t s work sometimes produced s u f f i c i e n t c r e d i t to a f f o r d the gradual purchase, lease or r e n t a l of small p a r c e l s of land that he could r e - s e l l , sub-lease or otherwise manipulate as a m a t e r i a l a s s e t ; or he simply accumulated land f o r f u t u r e bequeath. Despite the laws and p r a c t i c e s which favored p a r t i b l e i n h e r i -tance, the small holdings of l a b o r e r s meant that u n s k i l l e d or untrained workers i n h e r i t e d only a l i t t l e , i f any a r a b l e land from t h e i r u s u a l l y l e s s a f f l u e n t f a t h e r s and were o f t e n l e f t to t h e i r own means to acquire a s u i t a b l e farm property f o r a maximum p o s s i b l e l e v e l of a g r i c u l t u r a l s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y . H i s smaller income, measured i n the c r e d i t h i s l a b o r brought, hindered h i s o p p o r t u n i t i e s i n t h i s regard, as i t d i d t h e r e a f t e r c o n s t r i c t h i s a b i l i t y to amass and reserve land f o r p o s s i b l e h e i r s . Nevertheless, leased land was a v a i l a b l e to him and i n most cases the r u r a l l a b o r e r d i d manage to o b t a i n a r e s p e c t a b l e home l o t acreage; one that would provide immediate m a t e r i a l support and that could be enlarged and l a t e r p o s s i b l y subdivided, i n very s m a l l , f o u r — and f i v e - a c r e p l o t s , and t r a n s f e r r e d as subsistence bases to one or more successors. The gap between s k i l l e d and u n s k i l l e d men was r e a l i n terms of economic c o n d i t i o n , o p p o r t u n i t y , and legacy, but i t d i d not prevent the r u r a l landed l a b o r e r from enjoying a f i r m measure of independence and p o s s i b l y f u l l p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the a f f a i r s of the community. In Massachusetts a l l men were taxed according to t h e i r r e a l and personal worth; both the value of property and the value of work were included i n p u b l i c tax assessments. The method of tax assessment used i n the province was based upon a percentage of the value of r e a l e s t a t e and earnings. The t o t a l value of property was c a l c u l a t e d at s i x times i t s annual rent v a l u e . This was taxed along w i t h personal estate or income, at r a t e s which ranged from a \"penny i n the pound\" to over eightpence, depending on l o c a l and p r o v i n c i a l f i n a n c i a l needs. The r a t e s were set annually, and seldom d i d the tax exceed one or two pence per pound of income or r e a l e s t a t e . The m a j o r i t y of u n s k i l l e d workers paid more tax on the value of t h e i r personal e s t a t e s — farm produce and other measured work income — than they d i d on r e a l property. The balance was roughly equal f o r most a r t i s a n - f a r m e r s . The p o i n t to be noted here i s that most l a b o r e r s and husbandmen were taxed. Fewer than 10% of a l l r u r a l white male a d u l t s were not rated i n any given year and the i n d i v i d u a l s included i n that 10% d i d not always appear p e r e n n i a l l y . To be considered r a t e a b l e and then assessed i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts was to be judged s o l v e n t . The great m a j o r i t y of u n s k i l l e d workers i n the a g r a r i a n towns were con-sidered solvent under the law i n the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , on the b a s i s of t h e i r combined r e a l and personal worth. This solvency gave un-s k i l l e d workers a c t u a l or p o t e n t i a l access to l o c a l p o l i t i c a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n w h i l e i t o f f e r e d them assurances of continued s o c i a l and economic w e l f a r e . ^ While u n s k i l l e d workers d i d p a r t i c i p a t e i n the p o l i t i c a l , s o c i a l and economic a f f a i r s of the l o c a l community, they d i d so at a l e v e l g e n e r a l l y below that of the a r t i s a n - f a r m e r , merchant or l a r g e landowner. C e r t a i n l y , r u r a l l a b o r e r s and husbandmen represented a stratum of \"second-class c i t i z e n s , \" and there were v a r i o u s r e s t r i c -t i o n s imposed on them by t h e i r economic l i m i t a t i o n s . U n s k i l l e d workers r a r e l y occupied senior l o c a l e l e c t e d or appointed p o s i t i o n s ; selectmen, j u s t i c e s , s e c r e t a r i e s and most posts at l e a s t to the l e v e l of constable were held by commercial farmers, merchants, entrepreneurs, and a r t i s a n s . Only minor appointments such as \"hog-reeves\" and \"fence-viewers\" were given to l a b o r e r s who were w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d i n the community. S o c i a l l y , u n s k i l l e d workers married l a t e r , had smaller f a m i l i e s and l i v e d i n more modest m a t e r i a l circumstances than d i d a r t i s a n s . The l a b o r e r ' s household s i z e was n e c e s s a r i l y smaller than that of others i n the community; many a r t i s a n s , f o r example, augmented t h e i r l a r g e r f a m i l y s i z e by i n c l u d -ing a r e s i d e n t apprentice and servant g i r l . Many of those servant g i r l s were the daughters of l o c a l l a b o r e r s ; and t h i s form of contact between the f a m i l i e s of v o c a t i o n a l groups was a l i n k a g e i n the socio economic bond that ran through communities. The b a r t e r and l a b o r exchange between a r t i s a n s and l a b o r e r s , t h e i r sons, daughters and wives, and a l i m i t e d p o l i t i c a l v o i c e i n the community gave the un-s k i l l e d worker an important s o c i a l and o c c u p a t i o n a l niche i n s o c i e t y The f a c t that t h i s niche i n d i c a t e d a lower economic s t a t u s and was r e f l e c t e d i n a diminished s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l r o l e d i d mean a 128 reduced standard of c i t i z e n s h i p . But t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n was not perman-ent and a b s o l u t e l y p e r p e t u a l . Although t h e i r c o n d i t i o n s and circumstances were l e s s rewarding and t h e i r horizons lower than those of a r t i s a n s , r u r a l u n s k i l l e d workers were not a f i x e d subordinate c l a s s . The e l e c t i o n and appointment of former l a b o r e r s i n Watertown, B r a i n t r e e , Dedham and other towns i s evidence of some s o c i a l and 29 p o l i t i c a l m o b i l i t y . G e n e r a l l y , l o c a l economic and v o c a t i o n a l c o n d i t i o n s were s t a b l e and p e r s i s t e n t . But these agents of c o n t i n u i t y d i d not preclude some oc c u p a t i o n a l , economic and s o c i a l m o b i l i t y f o r i n d i v i d u a l s and groups. The minor husbandman, occupying ten or fewer acres of c u l t i v a t e d land and busy w i t h the seasonal and p e r e n n i a l pressures of subsistence was ever concerned w i t h h i s immediate and short-term needs, r e l y i n g upon and applying h i s l a b o r i n a complex of a c t i v i t i e s , o b l i g a t i o n s and n e c e s s i t i e s . His opportunity f o r v o c a t i o n a l and subsequent economic improvement was abridged by the l i m i t s of h i s p r o p r i e t a r y value and the r e l a t i v e worth of h i s work. Yet the socio-economic boundaries imposed upon the r u r a l l a b o r e r d i d not always devolve to t h e i r c h i l d r e n . Sons could transcend t h e i r f a t h e r s ' s t a t i o n s i n a s o c i e t y that f o s t e r e d f l u i d work patte r n s and which supported continued p e r s o n a l i z e d economic t r a n s a c t i o n . The simple i n t e g r a t i o n of u n s k i l l e d workers i n t o a l l corners of the l o c a l economies and the common a f f i l i a t i o n w i t h the la n d , i n the form of independent and p r i v a t e subsistence farming, created a constant s o c i a l i n t e r c o u r s e between s k i l l e d and u n s k i l l e d 129 workers, t h e i r f a m i l i e s and a l l r e s i d e n t s and t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e s o c i a l and economic p o s i t i o n s and f u n c t i o n . In t h i s s e t t i n g i t was d i f f i c u l t , i f not imp o s s i b l e , f o r any group or even a m a j o r i t y i n the community to exclude, segregate or debase the u n s k i l l e d worker and h i s f a m i l y when the l a t t e r normally possessed the ethnic f e a t u r e s and r e l i g i o u s a f f i l i a t i o n t hat were r e -quired of everyone e l s e f o r membership i n the corporate Massachusetts town. Moreover, these workers were v i t a l , as i n d i v i d u a l s , to the support of the towns' o r d e r l y m a t e r i a l undertakings. Without the apparatus or d e s i r e f o r a permanent i n d u s t r i a l or a g r i c u l t u r a l l a b o r i n g c l a s s , there e x i s t e d no means or i n s t i t u t i o n a l precedent f o r c r e a t i n g or maintaining a body of cheap, d i s c i p l i n e d u n s k i l l e d l a b o r . The s t a b i l i t y of the Massachusetts town was pr e d i c a t e d upon p r i n c i p l e s of balanced co-existence i n a l l matters of community l i f e . The corporate-congregational system was best upheld when the m a j o r i t y of i n h a b i t a n t s shared at l e a s t some b a s i c e q u a l i t y . In r u r a l s o c i e t y , residency was tenuous without a f i x e d and necessary place i n the community; the possession of even a small farm acreage, a u s e f u l work a l t e r n a t i v e and a d a p t a b i l i t y i n the conduct of i n d i v i d u a l economic and v o c a t i o n a l behavior were the q u a l i t i e s that ensured a place i n the community f o r the r u r a l l a b o r e r . C e r t a i n f a m i l i e s , at c e r t a i n times, d i d c o n s t i t u t e a dependent source of a v a i l a b l e cheap l a b o r f o r the more a f f l u e n t . But few men, of any v o c a t i o n a l or economic standing, needed or could a f f o r d f u l l - t i m e , permanent employees. Moreover, there was seldom a surplus of l a b o r e r s i n r u r a l p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts. Indeed, the records suggest that there 130 was a constant marginal shortage of la b o r that was aggravated by 30 p e r i o d i c excessive shortages. These more troublesome shortages always occurred at c r i t i c a l j u n c t u r e s i n the a g r i c u l t u r a l calendar however, p r i n c i p a l l y at harvest time. These f a v o r a b l e o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r the farm worker o f t e n were countered by shortages of work during some w i n t e r s . But u s u a l l y there was a s t a b l e demand f o r u n s k i l l e d l a b o r ; and that demand was made by m u l t i p l e and s m a l l — s c a l e competitive elements. The scope of t h i s competition and the short-term nature of c o n t r a c t u a l - o r b a r t e r - l a b o r accords meant that the u n s k i l l e d worker and h i s f a m i l y were never bound to a s i n g l e source of o u t s i d e employ-ment; one that could n u l l i f y the worker's l i b e r t y to engage i n the l o c a l economy as an independent f a c t o r . The u n s k i l l e d worker, d e s p i t e h i s lower earning c a p a c i t i e s and economic p r o f i l e , could not be e x p l o i t e d by long-term dependency or commitment to u n f a i r low r e t u r n f o r h i s l a b o r . Once again, as the form of the r u r a l economy allowed the s k i l l e d worker to be both craftsman and farmer-landowner, that same s t r u c t u r e granted the u n s k i l l e d worker an a g r i c u l t u r a l base and a c e r t a i n freedom and m o b i l i t y i n h i s other and necessary v o c a t i o n a l p u r s u i t s . Indeed, the economic framework of r u r a l c u l t u r e was founded upon those c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and demanded that m o b i l i t y from a l l i t s l a b o r p a r t i c i p a n t s . In that way the r u r a l u n s k i l l e d worker was part of a con-t i n u i n g paradox. While he was, i n most r e s p e c t s , a p r i v a t e dispenser of h i s time, s e r v i c e and l a b o r , not u n l i k e the a r t i s a n , nevertheless he was burdened by the socio-economic and p o l i t i c a l f a c t o r s enumerated 131 e a r l i e r . With no serious expansion of the s k i l l e d l a b o r economy, and w i t h no easy or p r e d i c t a b l e access to more land and more extensive farming i n the l o c a l community, the u n s k i l l e d worker, h i s f a m i l y and h e i r s had to seek economic and s o c i a l improvement w i t h i n a f a i r l y s t a b l e and sometimes s t a t i c l o c a l economy. The most p r a c t i c a l and common method of advancement f o r the a d u l t l a b o r i n g farmer was a p a t i e n t a p p l i c a t i o n of h i s l a b o r over time under a personal program of constant work and d i s c i p l i n e d f r u g a l i t y . Thus, a man might g r a d u a l l y lease or purchase a few more acres of farm land or more l i v e s t o c k . Often t h i s was achieved through the development of i n d i s -p e n s i b l e or more p r o f i t a b l e s k i l l s . By o b s e r v a t i o n , experience and i n f o r m a l i n s t r u c t i o n the u n s k i l l e d worker improved h i s d e x t e r i t y and promoted the demand f o r and value of h i s l a b o r i n many non - c r a f t s s p e c i a l t i e s . The more s u c c e s s f u l husbandmen and a g r a r i a n l a b o r e r s were very o f t e n e c l e c t i c handymen who p r a c t i c e d v a r i o u s s k i l l s up to but short of the l e v e l of the formal i n s t r u c t e d trades. And as i t i s not p o s s i b l e to lump together a l l a r t i s a n - f a r m e r s as possessing equal a p t i t u d e , worth and s t a t u s , or v o c a t i o n a l behaviour, there, was a l s o a graduation of c o n d i t i o n s among u n s k i l l e d workers. Some were simply b e t t e r workers, more r e l i a b l e and p r o f i c i e n t than others and more s o p h i s t i c a t e d managers of t h e i r time, b a r t e r arrangements and lands. Some bartered t h e i r l a b o r f o r c a p i t a l c r e d i t w i t h which to secure land or support a l a t e r a p p r e n t i c e s h i p . Many of these men o f t e n 132 a s p i r e d to and matched the s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l c r e d e n t i a l s of the average a r t i s a n - f a r m e r , without ever having learned or p r a c t i c e d an a c c r e d i t e d c r a f t s s k i l l . An outstanding example of the m u l t i - t a l e n t e d , i n d i s p e n s i b l e handyman-laborer was Cockerel Reeves of Essex county, who spent over twenty years as a l a b o r e r before s e t t l i n g on h i s own farm. He l i v e d i n the town of Salem but d i d most of h i s work i n neighboring a g r i c u l t u r a l towns. According to h i s own r e c o r d , Reeves considered himself a \" c i t i z e n \" and an important man \"of business.\" He was e x c e p t i o n a l among l a b o r e r s i n that he kept accounts of h i s d a i l y and short-term l a b o r agreements. To emphasize h i s v e r s a t i l i t y , w i t h i n the space of three months i n 1711 he charged separate employers f o r \" p a s t u r i n g and c a r i n g f o r a horse, making c l o g s , going to i s l a n d w i t h s h i p , making h e e l s , cording wood, p u l l i n g down a barn, washing f i s h , making a saw, three days work on ship [ b u i l d i n g ] , work aboard s h i p , p u t t i n g up a bedstead, work i n garden, g r i n d i n g k n i v e s , making a hoe handle, making c i d e r , k i l l i n g lambs, c a r t i n g ten yards of crap, framing, slat-work.\" I f Reeves was not t y p i c a l of the r u r a l l a b o r e r . h i s . v a r i e t y of work does: i n d i c a t e the kinds of jobs a v a i l a b l e to the 31 u n s k i l l e d ' worker. O f f s p r i n g d i d not a u t o m a t i c a l l y i n h e r i t t h e i r f a t h e r s ' v o c a t i o n a l and socio-economic s t a t u s . The adult sons of r u r a l l a b o r -e r s , i n the event of no i n h e r i t a b l e l a n d , or no prospect of reasonable purchase or l e a s e of land and l a c k i n g an apprenticed s k i l l , were not i n e v i t a b l y assumed to repeat t h e i r f a t h e r s ' experiences. Adult v o l u n t a r y a p p r e n t i c e s h i p , i n another l o c a t i o n at an opportune time, o f f e r e d one means of improved v o c a t i o n a l opportunity. New towns i n the west of the province or i n New Hampshire, w i t h cheaper land and obtainable land r e s e r v e s , made a g r i c u l t u r a l s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y a r e a l i t y 32 f o r some. A son of an u n s k i l l e d worker might even remain i n the town of h i s b i r t h and endure a precarious l i v e l i h o o d u n t i l he could p l a n t himself on a small independent farm. Or, he might take a l a t e a p p renticeship l o c a l l y , i f the opportunity arose and i f he could arrange a personal s e r v i t u d e indenture w i t h a craftsman i n order to defray the cost of ap p r e n t i c e s h i p . Many u n s k i l l e d men obtained and developed high demand s e r v i c e occupations such as c a r t i n g , sawing, cider-making and s m a l l - s c a l e m i l l i n g . By these means, u n s k i l l e d , sometimes l a n d l e s s men improved t h e i r c o n d i t i o n s , increased t h e i r incomes and e v e n t u a l l y possessed some land and a l a r g e r measure of economic independence and s e c u r i t y . Some l a n d l e s s men removed to Boston or Salem to go to sea or to attempt to secure a p p r e n t i c e s h i p s i n the many c r a f t s p r a c t i c e d i n 33 , the commercial economies. * Some became s a i l o r s f o r pa r t of the year, r e t u r n i n g to r u r a l communities when a g r i c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t y created a 34 higher than usual demand f o r u n s k i l l e d l a b o r . Of course, geographical m o b i l i t y was more convenient f o r unmarried males than f o r those who had been s e t t l e d by home and f a m i l y ; yet many married u n s k i l l e d r u r a l men manned the New England c o a s t i n g v e s s e l s f o r part of t h e i r incomes. In s h o r t , d e s p i t e the r e l a t i v e permanence of the r u r a l s o c i e t y ' s v a r i o u s i n s t i t u t i o n s and p r a c t i c e s , no f i x e d , permanent and transgen-134 e r a t i o n a l subordinate working c l a s s e x i s t e d or evolved. W i t h i n the continuous and p r e d i c t a b l e patterns of communal s o c i e t y and i t s economy, workers were f r e e to change occupations, l e a r n s k i l l s , determine t h e i r v o c a t i o n a l and economic contacts and a s p i r e to the i d e a l of t r a n s m i t t a b l e landed e s t a t e . Moreover, workers were not bound to repeat the p r e c i s e or even general work h a b i t s and s o c i o -economic c o n d i t i o n s of t h e i r forebearers. S t i l l , a d i s t i n c t i o n was maintained between s k i l l e d and u n s k i l l e d workers. I t was not a l e g a l d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n except where the law i n s i s t e d on c e r t a i n c r a f t s c r e d e n t i a l s i n the production of c e r t a i n e s s e n t i a l commodities or i n the p r a c t i c e of v a r i o u s s k i l l e d s e r v i c e s . Only r a r e l y d i d the law s i n g l e out a p a r t i c u l a r occupational group f o r s p e c i a l c o n t r o l or biased l e g i s l a t i o n . For example, when t r a n s i e n t workers sought 35 residence or when t h e i r presence threatened e x i s t i n g business. D i s t i n c t i o n s between s k i l l e d and u n s k i l l e d workers were not g e n e r a l l y determined by an g e n e a l o g i c a l precedent. Of course m i n o r i t y e t h n i c , r a c i a l or s e c t a r i a n backgrounds created automatic v o c a t i o n a l as w e l l as s o c i a l b a r r i e r s . But the laws concerning residency-: made eth n i c or r e l i g i o u s m i n o r i t i e s a very small part of the p o p u l a t i o n of most towns. These were e x p l i c i t i n the laws and p r a c t i c e s of \"warning out\" unwanted migrants. P r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts was approximately 3 6 90% E n g l i s h and 75% C o n g r e g a t i o n a l i s t . S o c i a l d i f f e r e n c e s between a r t i s a n s and l a b o r e r s were not formed by r e l i g i o n , race or parentage but r a t h e r by the nature of the labor requirements of the l o c a l 135 communities and by the m u l t i p l e o p t i o n s , t a l e n t s and ambitions of indiv i d u a l s ' . C e r t a i n l y the reduced economic and m a t e r i a l assets of poorer u n s k i l l e d workers tended to devolve to subsequent generations and a f f e c t the v o c a t i o n a l s t a t u s of successors. But those reduced assets did.not mean that the sons of l a b o r e r s had no a l t e r n a t i v e to t h e i r f a t h e r s ' s t a t i o n s i n s o c i e t y . The working l i f e of an u n s k i l l e d worker was s i m i l a r i n out-l i n e to that of the a r t i s a n - f a r m e r . I t was a blend of farm work and v a r i e d r e l a t e d and general l a b o r commitments and p r a c t i c e s . The combination of sabbaths, thanksgivings, days of f a s t and h u m i l i a t i o n , v a r i o u s s o c i a l , f a m i l i a l , p o l i t i c a l , weather and h e a l t h i n t e r r u p t i o n s l e f t the p r o v i n c i a l r u r a l worker w i t h some 200 to 300 working days to f i l l i n a year. The lower f i g u r e a p p l i e d to some a r t i s a n - f a r m e r s whose s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l o b l i g a t i o n s demanded a good d e a l of h i s time. Among the evidence remaining of annual days worked by v a r i o u s men i s that of John M a r s h a l l , a mason who worked between 228 and 241 days a year between 1700 and 1711.; he was p o l i t i c a l l y a c t i v e every year i n p o s i t i o n s ranging from m i l i t i a o f f i c e r to constable, and once as a selectman. John Reed, a shoemaker and farmer, served i n va r i o u s o f f i c i a l c a p a c i t i e s i n Weymouth w h i l e he averaged 250 working days a year i n the 1750s and 1760s. Joseph Andrews, a commercial farmer, normally worked between 210 and 260 days a year i n farm-related work, depending on \" s e r v i c e i n the town's b e h a l f . \" Cockerel Reeves, on the other hand, w i t h no c i v i c commitments, worked as many as 305 37 days i n one year, 1707. 136 A g r i c u l t u r a l and d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d work kept some going from l a t e March u n t i l mid-November. The most d i f f i c u l t months f o r work, n a t u r a l l y , were January through March. Then, the u n s k i l l e d worker was most o f t e n engaged i n whatever l i m i t e d c o n s t r u c t i o n and cartage work he could f i n d ; and he aided the working a r t i s a n s i n t h e i r shops or at t h e i r benches i f such work were a v a i l a b l e . Otherwise he broke and \"swingled\" f l a x s t a l k s i n t o usable f i b e r s and i f he could weave or s t i t c h , sew or k n i t he would r e t r e a t to h i s home to produce what he could i n t h i s \" f i r e s i d e \" a c t i v i t y . He cut wood or made s h i n g l e s or 38 l a t h s or b r i c k s . O c c a s i o n a l l y , he e x t r a c t e d p i t c h or potash or dug s a l t . Over the course of a year, some 75% of the u n s k i l l e d workers' l a b o r s were d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y t i e d to farming; f o r t h e i r own and f o r others' operations. This i n v o l v e d a l l manner of f i e l d l a b o r and l i v e s t o c k management. I t included b u t c h e r i n g , s k i n n i n g , packing and shearing. The l a b o r e r picked the stones from f i e l d s and carted them; he a l s o gathered and carted dung, wood, hides and produce; he b u i l t and r e p a i r e d fences and c l e a r e d d i t c h e s . He was, l i k e a l l workers and landowners, subject to l e g a l harvest impressment 39 when a shortened reaping season threatened l o c a l g r a i n y i e l d s . In p r o v i d i n g f o r b a s i c s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y , both the b e n e f i t s and inadequacies of subsistence farming were s i m i l a r f o r a r t i s a n and l a b o r e r a l i k e . A f u l l y developed and u t i l i z e d small farm of ten f e r t i l e and productive acres would r e t u r n v i r t u a l l y a l l the b a s i c foods consumed annually by a f a m i l y of f i v e . That prod u c t i o n , of the g r a i n and meat s t a p l e s , included f o r t y to s i x t y bushels of mixed e d i b l e g r a i n s , apples f o r c i d e r and t u r n i p s , and one-to-three slaughtered l i v e s t o c k , u s u a l l y one steer and one sheep or swine. The subsistence farmer i n eastern Massachusetts had l i t t l e o pportunity to supplement h i s d i e t w i t h w i l d b i r d s and game. The same ten-acre farm would provide between h a l f a n d . a l l of the five-member f a m i l y ' s b a s i c c l o t h i n g m a t e r i a l s of l e a t h e r , spun l i n e n and wool. When combined, these commodities c o n s t i t u t e d about h a l f or l e s s of the f a m i l y ' s m a t e r i a l budget. I f the f a m i l y wanted or re q u i r e d other foods such as eggs, b u t t e r , cheese, beer and f i s h , these had to be obtained w i t h work outside the home l o t , or w i t h a domestic e n t e r p r i s e such as c i d e r -p r e s s i n g , weaving or rough l e a t h e r work. Most other m a t e r i a l needs — cordwood, lumber, f u r n i t u r e and t o o l s — were paid f o r by other s e r v i c e s , as were taxes, t i t h e s and any lease payments. To l i v e at a m a t e r i a l l e v e l that was n e i t h e r too rude nor p r e c a r i o u s , the subsistence laborer-farmer was pressed to work as o f t e n and as hard as he could. While t h i s regime d i d not bestow any measure of refinement, l u x u r y or re g u l a r savings, i t could and d i d a f f o r d a b a s i c and manageable standard , , . . 40 of l i v i n g . A c h i e f concern of the laborer-farmer was w i t h securing as many working days as p o s s i b l e . His budget was determined more by qu a n t i t y of work than by q u a l i t y , although the b e t t e r h i s work was, the more s k i l l e d and l u c r a t i v e would be the kinds of tasks he was o f f e r e d . Therefore, he could not a f f o r d many missed days of employment. 138 The demand was normally so great f o r h i s labor that only weather and i l l h e a l t h forced him i n t o unproductive and unremunerative i d l e n e s s . S o c i a l l y , according to Perry M i l l e r , h i s r e c r e a t i o n and r e s t were regulated by the sabbath and he accorded him s e l f only a l i t t l e p l a y f u l 41 l e i s u r e . H i s la b o r s were p h y s i c a l , long and o f t e n l o n e l y and monotonous. Yet o v e r a l l i t was not a working l i f e of u n r e l i e v e d tedium and m e n i a l i t y . From day to day and from season to season there was some v a r i e t y i n the tasks the u n s k i l l e d worker was expected to perform. In the process of completing t h i s extended work p a t t e r n , the laborer-farmer was exposed to a great d e a l of s o c i a l contact w i t h the r e s t of the community. In many ways h i s labor and h i s s o c i a l l i f e were one, shared f i r s t w i t h h i s f a m i l y and extending to i n c l u d e h i s neighbors and a s i g n i f i c a n t p o r t i o n of the community. No matter how s e n s i t i v e he was to h e a l t h , weather and the v a r i a b l e p r o d u c t i v i t y of h i s farm, the r u r a l l a b o r e r u s u a l l y obtained a measure of s t a b i l i t y and opportunity w i t h i n his. community. He achieved t h i s by working long days, o f t e n at p h y s i c a l l y demanding t a s k s , and by p a r t i c i p a t i n g as an independent and u s e f u l member of an i n t i m a t e and mostly cash-f r e e l o c a l economy. 139 NOTES CHAPTER IV XH.W. Belknap, Trades and Tradesmen of Essex County (Salem, Mass.: 1929), passim. M. Arch. MSS., V o l s . 39-44, 47, 71 a l l give examples of contemporary usage. For \"Husbandmen,\" V o l . 40, pp. 478, 500, 645, 653. On \" l a b o r e r s \" see V o l . 44, pp. 10, 281, 599, 600 f f . On the use of the terms \"mechanic,\" \" a r t i s a n , \" \" h a n d i c r a f t s -man\" see Mass. Bay Recs. and Acts and Resolves, V o l s . 1-5. Both passim. 2M. Arch. MSS., I b i d . ; MHS Misc. Bd. MSS., \"De p o s i t i o n s . \" 3 MHS, Thwing Catalogue. Included i n the b i o g r a p h i c a l and es t a t e i n f o r m a t i o n are hundreds of examples of oc c u p a t i o n a l m o b i l i t y and t i t u l a r v a r i a t i o n s . 4W.H. Whitmore, ed., Massachusetts C i v i l L i s t (Albany: 1870), p. 86; Baker MSS., \"Jacob Adams Account Book.\" 5M. Arch. MSS., V o l . I , \" A g r i c u l t u r a l \" ; V o l s . 40-46, indexes, passim. 6M. Arch. MSS., V o l . 94, \"Muster Rolls',\" pp. 167-557. Over 2,500 names and occupations from r u r a l r e s i d e n t s were sampled from these l i s t s . Another 300 names and occupations were sampled from M. Arch. MSS., mostly, V o l s . 39-46, 70-71, 244-245. See Chapter 3, n. 2, t h i s paper. ^ O c c a s i o n a l l y the terms were used, o f t e n i n matters d e a l i n g w i t h poverty, i d l e n e s s and c h a r i t y . Then, i t was o f t e n urged that the poor and i d l e be taught \" s k i l l s , \" or be made \" s k i l l f u l . \" See e s p e c i a l l y the sermons of Samuel Cooper and Charles Chauncy at MHS and the laws governing a p p r e n t i c e s h i p and i d l e n e s s i n C o l o n i a l Laws, Mass. Bay Recs. and Acts and Resolves. The standard term f o r an i n d u s t r i a l \" s k i l l \" used i n indenture c o n t r a c t s was \"trade or mystery\" or \" a r t , trade or c a l l i n g , \" see MHS Misc. Bd., \"Apprentice Indentures,\" 1725. Appendix I I I , i . 140 On the question of general growth, stagnation or d e c l i n e i n the p r o v i n c i a l economy, see A l i c e Hanson Jones, \"Wealth Estimates f o r the New England Colonies About 1770,\" JEH 32 (1972), pp. 98-127; Marc E g n a l l , \"The Economic Development of the T h i r t e e n C o n t i n e n t a l C o l o n i e s , 1720-1775,\" WMQ 32 (1975), pp. 191-222; Stuart Bruchey, The Roots of American Economic Growth, 1607-1861 (New York: 1965), pp. 16-65. 1 0 J . P o t t e r , \"The Growth of American P o p u l a t i o n , 1700-1860,\" i n Glass and E v e r s l l e y , eds., P o p u l a t i o n i n H i s t o r y (London: 1965); D a n i e l Scott Smith, \"The Demographic H i s t o r y of C o l o n i a l New England,\" JEH 32 (1972), pp. 165-183; C l i f f o r d K. Shipton, \"Immigration to New England, 1680-1740,\" J o u r n a l of P o l i t i c a l Economy 44 (1936), pp. 225-239; J o s i a h Benton, Warning Out i n New England, 1656-1817 (Boston: 1911) 11 M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 94; Belknap, Trades and Occupations; J.T. Main, The S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e of Revolutionary America ( P r i n c e t o n : 1965), pp. 21-23, speaks of 10% of r u r a l Massachusetts workers as being a r t i s a n s . He i s r e f e r r i n g to f u l l — t i m e or even l a n d l e s s a r t i s a n s who d i d no personal farming. Main, l i k e o t h e r s , encourages the n o t i o n that to farm at the subsistence l e v e l i n the eighteenth century made one a \"farmer\" and nothing more. For a more r e a l i s t i c a p p r a i s a l of the s e l f -s u f f i c i e n c y and m u l t i - v o c a t i o n a l status of p r a c t i c a l l y a l l \"farmers,\" i n c l u d i n g the incidence of a r t i s a n s h i p among subsistence farmers, see P.W. B i d w e l l and John Falconer, H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e i n the Northern United S t a t e s , 1620-1860 (Washington: 1925), pp. 115-133. 12 A l i c e E a r l e , Home L i f e i n C o l o n i a l Days (New York: 1899), pp. 40 f f . ; Robert F. Seybolt, Apprenticeship and Apprenticeship Education i n C o l o n i a l New England and New York (New York: 1917). 13 M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 94, pp. 157-557; Main, S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e , pp. 7-43; B i d w e l l , Rural Economy i n New England ( H a r t f o r d : 1916), p. 241 f f . Although the l a t t e r deals mainly w i t h the e a r l y N a t i o n a l P e r i o d , the author i s at pains to e s t a b l i s h precedents i n the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d . For a sample of r u r a l occupations, see Chapter I I I , n. 2, t h i s paper. B i d w e l l , R u r a l Economy, I n t r o d u c t i o n . M. Arch MSS, V o l s . 130-134, \"Valuations of Towns.\" 141 Trench Coxe, View of the United States of America (London: 1794), pp. 442-460. Coxe went beyond New England and the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , of course, but h i s observations and views of the American farmer as being n e c e s s a r i l y v e r s a t i l e , m u l t i - v o c a t i o n a l and even dependent on other income sources and employment o f f e r s a sobering a n t i d o t e to h i s more i n f l u e n t i a l (to h i s t o r i a n s ) contemporary, Crevecoeur. The l a t t e r ' s c e lebrated \"new man,\" the stereotyped American yeoman, has p e r s i s t e d as an image of the eighteenth century farmer. See J . Hector St. J . Crevecoeur, L e t t e r s from an American Farmer ( r e p r i n t , New York: 1916). 16 General Warren, American Museum, V o l . 2 (1787), No. 4, p. 347. Robert R. Walcott, \"Husbandry i n C o l o n i a l New England,\" NEQ 9 (1936), pp. 218-52. On the l i m i t e d number of oxen see MHS MSS \"Roxbury V a l u a t i o n s , \" 1727; On farm implenents see B i d w e l l and Falconer, H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , esp. pp. 123-25. 1 7M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 8, p. 236, V o l . 12 \" E c c l e s i a s t i c a l , 1739-49,\" passim; Baker MSS. Account Books \"Nathaniel Chamberlin,\" \"Jacob Adams,\" \"John Reed,\" \"Cockerel Reeves\"; Appendix I. 18 Baker MSS., I b i d . ; Appendix I . 19 Abbot Smith, C o l o n i s t s i n Bondage (New York: 1947), pp. 28-29, 316-17; E.J. McManus, Black Bondage i n the North (Syracuse: 1973), pp. 36-107. Appendix I I I . 20 The most complete study of s e r v i t u d e i n Massachusetts i s Lawrence Towner, \"A Good Master Well Served: A S o c i a l H i s t o r y of Servitude i n Massachusetts, 1620-1750\" (unpublished Ph.D. T h e s i s , Northwestern, 1955). For the h i g h turnover i n servants i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts see MHS MSS, \"Benjamin Wadsworth Account Book and D i a r y 1692-1727.\" In a t h i r t y year period Wadsworth employed n e a r l y 100 s e r v a n t s , never more than two at a time. The average tenure per servant, male and female, was four months. For some of the reasons f o r servant turnover see Towner, \"A Fondness f o r Freedom: Servant P r o t e s t i n P u r i t a n S o c i e t y , \" WM£ 19 (1962), pp. 201-19. 21 B i d w e l l and Falconer, H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , p. 133. 22 Baker MSS \"Ebenezer Wright Account Book,\" \" A b i d i j a h Upton Accounts,\" \"Pearson Accounts,\" \"John Reed Account Book\"; MHS Misc. Bd. MSS, \"Depositions.\" M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 40, p. 585. 142 23 Robert F. Seybolt, Apprenticeship and Apprenticeship T r a i n i n g i n C o l o n i a l New England and New York (New York: 1 9 1 7 ) . 24 D.C. Coleman, \"Labour i n the E n g l i s h Economy of the Seventeenth Century,\" EHR 8 (1956), pp. 283-95; C.B. MacPherson, \"Servants and Laborers i n Seventeenth Century England\" i n Democratic Theory: Essays i n R e t r i e v a l (Oxford: 1973); J.R. Commons, et a l . , H i s t o r y of Labor i n the United S t a t e s , V o l . I (New York: 1917), pp. 25-168. E.S. F u r n i s s , The P o s i t i o n of the Laborer i n a System of N a t i o n a l i s m . . . (New York: 1920). 25 R u s s e l l R. Menard, \"From Servant to Freeholder: Statu s , M o b i l i t y and Property Accumulation i n 17th Century Maryland,\" WMQ 30 (1973), pp. 37-64. On the st a t u s of r u r a l l a b o r e r s i n England, see Peter L a s l e t t , The World We Have Lost (London: 1965), e s p e c i a l l y pp. 22-52, i n c l u d i n g Gregory King's assessment and census t a b l e s f o r 1688. \"^Appendix I. 27 V.S. C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufacturing i n the United S t a t e s , 1607-1860 (Washington: 1916), pp. 144-158; Main, S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e , pp. 68-114. The wage d i f f e r e n t i a l between s k i l l e d and u n s k i l l e d work (the l a t t e r 2/3 to 1/2 of s k i l l e d value) was constant from 1630 to 1775. The many account books at Baker MSS and the MHS Misc. Bd. MSS co n t a i n hundreds of examples to support t h i s . For a c t u a l wages, at va r i o u s times, see Main, pp. 68-114; U.S. Bureau of Labour S t a t i s t i c s , B u l l e t i n 499 (1929), \"Wages i n the C o l o n i a l P e r i o d . \" 28 MHS MSS \"Roxbury V a l u a t i o n s 1727\"; M. Arch. MSS, V o l s . 130-134, \"Valuations of Towns.\" On assessment and t a x i n g p r i n c i p l e s and laws and r a t e s see Acts and Resolves, V o l . I , pp. 92, 214, 413, 484 and annually through V o l s . 2-5. On f r a n c h i s e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s , v o t i n g and p o l i t i c a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n see Katherine Brown, \"The Controversy over the Franchise i n P u r i t a n Massachusetts, 1954-1974,\" WMQ 33 (1976), pp. 212-241; Michael Zuckerman, \" S o c i a l Context of Democracy i n Massachusetts,\" WMQ 25 (1968), pp. 523-44. 29 On c i v i c appointments see M. Arch. MSS, V o l s . 112-118, \"Towns\"; Watertown Records .1634-1829 (Watertown, Mass.: 1894-1939); S.A. Bates, e d i t o r , B r a i n t r e e Records 1640-1793; D.G. H i l l , ed., Dedham Records, 1635-1845. Kenneth Lockridge and Alan K r e i d e r , \"The E v o l u t i o n of Mass. Town Government, 1640-1740,\" WMQ 23 (1966), pp. 549-574. On f a m i l i e s and r e l a t i v e f a m i l y s i z e , see Smith, \"Demographic H i s t o r y , \" p. 177. 143 30 R.B. M o r r i s , Government and Labor i n E a r l y America (New York: 1946), p. 60 f f . C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufactures, pp. 152-155. 3 1 B a k e r MSS, \"Cockerel Reeves Account Book; 1708-1729\"; MHS Thwing Catalogue contains many hundreds of cases of upward economic m o b i l i t y among \" l a b o r e r s . \" The evidence i s drawn l a r g e l y from probate and deed records. Another f i n e d e t a i l e d example of a p r o s p e r i n g , i n d u s t r i o u s and t a l e n t e d l a n d l e s s l a b o r e r i s MHS MSS \"Benjamin Bangs D i a r y 1742-61.\" See a l s o A.L. Cummings, Rural Household I n v e n t o r i e s (Boston: 1964). 32 L o i s K. Mathews, The Expansion of New England (Boston: 1909). 3 3 B a k e r MSS, \"V.S. C l a r k Notes,\" Box 2. 3 A B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , p. 133; \"Benjamin Bangs D i a r y . \" For many examples of the r u r a l o r i g i n s of e n l i s t i n g s a i l o r s see MHS MSS \"Rovert Treat Paine Papers,\" V o l . I . See a l s o Elmo Hohman, H i s t o r y of American Merchant Seamen (New York: 1956). 35 As i n the case of \" d i s r u p t i v e , d i s r e p u t a b l e \" t r a n s i e n t p e d l a r s . See \"An Act against Hawkers, Pe d l a r s and P e t t y Chapmen,\" Acts and Resolves, V o l . I , pp. 720-21 (November 1713) and renewed t h e r e a f t e r , Acts and Resolves, V o l . 2, pp. 47, 232, 385. On c r i m i n a l proceedings against v a r i o u s u n s k i l l e d , u s u a l l y t r a n s i e n t , workers see M. Arch. MSS, V o l s . 43-44. 3 6 Benton, Warning Out. On the e t h n i c and r e l i g i o u s homogeneity of p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts, see H i s t o r i c a l S t a t i s t i c s , C o l o n i a l Times to the Present Washington: 1961), S e c t i o n Z. '37MHS MSS, \"John M a r s h a l l D i a r y 1688-1711\"; \"Joseph Andrews Jo u r n a l 1731-1777\"; \"John Met c a l f Commonplace Book 1730-90.\" Baker MSS, \"John Reed Account Book\"; \"Pearson Accounts.\" These prominant a r t i s a n s , farmers and merchants, a l l a c t i v e s o c i a l l y and p o l i t i c a l l y a l l worked more than two hundred days a year. For the working days of husbandmen and l a b o r e r s , see Walcott, \"Husbandry.\" For the meaning of the sabbath and other r e l i g i o u s h o l i d a y s see Sidney Ahlstrom, A R e l i g i o u s H i s t o r y of the American People (New Haven: 1972). 38 Walcott, \"Husbandry\"; \"John P o r t e r Accounts\" and \"Samuel P r a t t Accounts\" i n \"John Reed Account Book.\" B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 115-131. 144 I b i d . , on harvest impressment see Mass. Bay Recs.. V o l . I l l , p. 102. This A c t , f i r s t issued i n the 1650s under v a r i o u s forms, remained on the s t a t u t e books throughout the eighteenth century and was o f t e n r e f e r r e d t o . See M. Arch., V o l s . 42-43. 40 \"Joseph Andrews J o u r n a l \" ; B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 115-131; Main, S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e , pp. 115-163; Walcott, \"Husbandry.\" 41 Perry M i l l e r , The New England Mind: From Colony to Province (Cambridge: 1953), esp. Book IV. Even M a r s h a l l , a s u c c e s s f u l a r t i s a n who had some c o n t r o l over h i s income was b i t t e r when he missed work through bad weather or i l l h e a l t h : \"Diary,\" pp. 140, 152, 168. Cockerel Reeves, w h i l e working as a day l a b o r e r , took one day of \" p l a y \" i n one year, see \"Account Book,\" n.p. For a comparison w i t h the annual working days and r e c r e a t i o n h a b i t s of contemporaneous E n g l i s h a r t i s a n s and l a b o r e r s , see K e i t h Thomas, \"Work and L e i s u r e i n P r e - i n d u s t r i a l S o c i e t y , \" Past and Present 29 (1964), pp. 50-66, CHAPTER V THE RURAL SPECIALIST Not a l l f r e e workers i n r u r a l Massachusetts were a r t i s a n - f a r m e r s or laborer-farmers. Those who were not, though they represented a m i n o r i t y , were numerous enough and t h e i r s p e c i a l i t i e s important enough to exert some s i g n i f i c a n t i n f l u e n c e on the l o c a l economies and f u r t h e r d e f i n e the r u r a l l a b o r economy. They were the f u l l - t i m e s p e c i a l i s t s or s i n g l e occupation workers of t h i s s o c i e t y . They included the f u l l -time farmer, the f u l l — t i m e , non-farming a r t i s a n and the non-farming s e r v i c e trades such as m a t e r i a l s u p p l i e r s and manufacturers and small merchants. This group, or groups, c o n s t i t u t e d perhaps o n e - t h i r d of the adul t f r e e white male population of r u r a l p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts. N a t u r a l l y , t h i s number included the 20% or so of the po p u l a t i o n who possessed no a r a b l e land; and i t would i n c l u d e a f u r t h e r 10% of the t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n who conducted f u l l time personal commercial farm operations. G e n e r a l l y , t h i s o n e - t h i r d of the working p o p u l a t i o n was made up of equal p a r t s of the main s i n g l e - o c c u p a t i o n c a t e g o r i e s . Thus i n r e g i o n s , i f not i n every town, 10% of the workers would be f u l l -time a r t i s a n s and 10% were i n the s e r v i c e trades as e x c l u s i v e enter-p r i s e s ; another 10% would be f u l l - t i m e farmers tending e n t i r e l y to t h e i r own properties.\"'\" The s o c i e t y ' s few p r o f e s s i o n a l s , the j u s t i c e s , lawyers, teachers and p h y s i c i a n s , were almost i n v a r i a b l y a l s o farmers, l a r g e 145 146 landowners or merchants. The number of l a n d l e s s f u l l - t i m e l a b o r e r s was not s i g n i f i c a n t and the status of these workers, l i k e those i n s e r v i t u d e , was t r a n s i t o r y . As noted, the l a n d l e s s l a b o r e r was always subject to a change of status through the a c q u i s i t i o n of some la n d , m i g r a t i o n from the community, adu l t a p p r e n t i c e s h i p , v o l u n t a r y s h o r t -term r e s i d e n t i a l s e r v i t u d e or involvement i n an independent s e r v i c e e n t e r p r i s e such as woodcutting, sawing, c a r t i n g , forgework, brickmaking, s a l t mining or any assortment of these that would ensure long-term and r e l i a b l e subsistence. General short-term, day-to-day farm and a n c i l l a r y l a b o r , f o r which the demand was constant and h i g h , was performed by the community's landed l a b o r i n g p o p u l a t i o n . I t was r a r e , i n the a g r i c u l -t u r a l towns, f o r an \" u n s k i l l e d \" worker to s p e c i a l i z e as a c o n t r a c t l a b o r e r , even i f he possessed a v a r i e t y of s e m i - s k i l l e d a p t i t u d e s , 2 without a l s o possessing a small acreage of productive farm land. But s i m i l a r v a r i a b l e s d i d not apply to other r u r a l work s p e c i a l i s t s ; and where s p e c i a l i z a t i o n occurred, i t was o f t e n the r e s u l t of the d e l i b e r a t e preference of the i n d i v i d u a l s p e c i a l i s t . C e r t a i n l y e x t e r n a l matters i n f l u e n c e d the d e c i s i o n by i n d i v i d u a l s to pursue a s i n g l e work occupation. L o c a l demand and opportunity were c r i t i c a l f a c t o r s , and the i n d i v i d u a l ' s background and circumstance f u r t h e r determined the n e c e s s i t y or advantages to s p e c i a l i z a t i o n . For example, a young, p o s s i b l y l a n d l e s s a r t i s a n might have forsaken farming e n t i r e l y i f the l o c a l market could support him i n f u l l — t i m e employment of h i s c r a f t . And a son r a i s e d to i n h e r i t a f u l l y f u n c t i o n i n g commercial 147 farm might never contemplate or be o f f e r e d an a l t e r n a t i v e to f u l l - t i m e independent farming. U s u a l l y , however, the d e c i s i o n on a s u i t a b l e v o c a t i o n was based on personal choice. Most men who d i d become s i n g l e occupation s p e c i a l i s t s d i d have access to a l t e r n a t i v e s . Few i n t h i s s o c i e t y were without the occasion to a v a i l themselves of two or more labor a l t e r n a t i v e s . In f a c t the s o c i a l and economic o r g a n i z -a t i o n of p r o v i n c i a l r u r a l s o c i e t y encouraged and even demanded cross and m u l t i p l e l a b o r h a b i t s . Those who.chose to narrow t h e i r work e n t e r p r i s e i n t o a s p e c i f i c and e x c l u s i v e occupation d i d so f o r reasons of p e r s o n a l i t y , a p t i t u d e and preference; and to a c e r t a i n degree they d i d so a l s o f o r personal gain. Some were i n p o s i t i o n s to e x p l o i t the advantages of b e t t e r l a n d , e a s i e r c a p i t a l funding or access to t r a n s -p o r t a t i o n . Hence, many r u r a l s p e c i a l i s t s were or stemmed from or became s o c i e t y ' s more secure, f o r t u n a t e or g i f t e d , ambitious and even 3 w e a l t h i e r l a b o r p l u r a l i t y . In the l a b o r h e i r a r c h y of the r u r a l economy i t was o f t e n these s p e c i a l i s t s who occupied the highest s o c i a l l e v e l s as a l a b o r a r i s t o c r a c y or e l i t e . But the same q u a l i t i e s of economic l o c a l i s m and communalism which made pe r s o n a l i z e d and pragmatic working h a b i t s the dominant l a b o r mode, a l s o tempered s o c i a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n the l a b o r h i e r a r c h y . R u r a l s p e c i a l i s t s , though t h e i r work might have y i e l d e d a high economic and s o c i a l r e t u r n , i n some cases, could not remove themselves from the context of the l o c a l and wholly c o l l e c t i v e labor economy. That i s to say, they d i d not stand apart from the community 148 as a s p e c i a l c l a s s of employers, f o r example, but were compelled to conform to the s c a l e and l i m i t a t i o n s and labor p r a c t i c e s of the l o c a l economy. Most important, they d i d not form an a l l i a n c e of superi o r 4 or i n f l u e n t i a l or c o n s c i o u s l y c o l l e c t i v e s e l f - i n t e r e s t . They remained as d i s t i n c t and i n d i v i d u a l components i n the shared and interdependent economic world of the r u r a l community. As such they were workers themselves and d i d not c o n t r o l the la b o r of others to any great extent. Their uniqueness l a y i n the p a r t i c u l a r s t y l e and o r g a n i z a t i o n of t h e i r work p r a c t i c e s . Their conformity was imposed by the u n i v e r s a l n e c e s s i t y of work and the communal purposes of labor.~* One simple d e f i n i t i o n of the p r o v i n c i a l commercial farmer was that he exchanged no work w i t h o t h e r s , a g r i c u l t u r a l l y or otherwise, except w i t h members of h i s f a m i l y . He spent h i s e n t i r e working year w i t h i n the p r e c i n c t s of h i s , or c l o s e r e l a t i v e s ' , farming operations. Normally, the f u l l - t i m e farmer began commercial operations f o l l o w i n g the i n h e r i t a n c e or e a r l y possession of a comparatively l a r g e c u l t i v a t e d or a r a b l e acreage of superior s o i l q u a l i t y ; land that was w e l l watered . f o r l i v e s t o c k and f r e e of n a t u r a l o b s t a c l e s to t i l l a g e , such as h i l l s , r a v i n e s and rock outcrops. I f he had been w i l l e d the necessary amount of land he was probably the son of a s u c c e s s f u l man who might have had some or a l l of h i s sons t r a i n e d i n an a l t e r n a t i v e c r a f t i n t h e i r formative years. In that event, upon r e c e i p t of the l a n d , the pros p e c t i v e farmer would put aside h i s other work to devote himself to f u l l - t i m e farming. This r e q u i r e d a s u f f i c i e n t l y w e l l organized and, i n Massachusetts, a thoroughly v a r i e d o p e r a t i o n , or one that could be made to f u n c t i o n as such. I f the i n h e r i t e d land was only p a r t i a l l y or even m a r g i n a l l y c u l t i v a t e d and stocked, as was o f t e n the case, the new p r o p r i e t o r would be o b l i g e d to support himself w i t h other work w h i l e he farmed at a subsistence l e v e l and e v e n t u a l l y converted unbroken or disused land to c u l t i v a t i o n to the p o i n t where the farm would produce a complete l i v e l i h o o d . In that case, the gradual and d e l i b e r a t e process of abandoning a l l or any other work to become a f u l l - t i m e farmer was a personal d e c i s i o n . I h . a c u l t u r e where land was a common and d e s i r e d asset and farming the p r i n c i p a l occupation, i t was i n e v i t a b l e that f u l l - t i m e farming should e x i s t , d e s p i t e the commercial and l a b o r l i m i t a t i o n s . Moreover, the f a c t that most men were r a i s e d to a h a b i t of both farm and a l t e r n a t i v e work s k i l l s adds to the element of personal choice as a determinant of f u l l - t i m e farming. Most a r t i s a n - f a r m e r s were o b l i g e d , and some p r e f e r r e d to spend t h e i r working l i v e s mixing farm w i t h non-farm occupations. This f l e x i b i l i t y was seen as the most s u i t a b l e means f o r accommodating present and f u t u r e needs and f o r i n v o l v i n g the i n c l u s i v e f a m i l y u n i t i n the l o c a l economy. Often, the a r t i s a n or part-time farmer t r i e d but f a i l e d to progress to f u l l -time farming. When he f a i l e d , i t was because he d i d not amass s u f f i c i e n t land to e x p l o i t . Or, because of the i n s u f f i c i e n t time and la b o r of h i m s e l f , h i s f a m i l y or bartered l a b o r i n the community, he was unable to e x p l o i t any aggregate of land he d i d possess or amass. Then, h i s unused land would l i e as an a s s e t , as n e g o t i a b l e , t r a n s f e r r a b l e property, and not as an e x c l u s i v e l a b o r endeavor.\" Thus, choice was combined w i t h opportunity and m a t e r i a l pre-c o n d i t i o n s as the p r i n c i p a l determinant i n who became a commercial farmer, how and under what c o n d i t i o n s t h i s was achieved, and the numbers who a c t u a l l y met the v a r i o u s c r i t e r i a . Along w i t h the necessary q u a n t i t y of land and an appropriate a g r i c u l t u r a l d i v e r s i f i -c a t i o n , the f u l l - t i m e farmer a l s o r e q u i r e d r e g u l a r a s s i s t a n c e and the constant cooperation of a v a i l a b l e l a b o r . This l a t t e r was best accomplished by the extended f a m i l y a g r i c u l t u r a l e n t e r p r i s e . Here, adjacent or nearby farms were occupied by a f a t h e r , b r o t h e r , brother i n law, cousin or u n c l e . 7 Together they owned, leased or rented and shared some common t i l l a g e , grass and pasturage acreage. They a s s i s t e d each other w i t h r e c i p r o c a l l a b o r and s e r v i c e on the r e s p e c t i v e \"home l o t s \" and exchanged and c i r c u l a t e d the l a b o r s of t h e i r own f u l l -time or seasonal servants when necessary. Seeding, weeding, haying and h a r v e s t i n g , along w i t h l i v e s t o c k p a s t u r i n g , w i n t e r i n g and k i l l i n g , were \"the more common c o l l e c t i v e e n t e r p r i s e s and re q u i r e d concerted l a b o r . These tasks were performed, when p o s s i b l e , i n r o t a t i o n on the r e s p e c t i v e i n d i v i d u a l holdings by a l l or s e v e r a l members of the extended operations. In t h i s system the p a r t i c u l a r acreage, produce, management and income were the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and reward of the i n d i v i d u a l farmer. The independent f u l l - t i m e farmer owned and operated h i s own farm, c e r t a i n l y , but he d i d so u s u a l l y as par t of a g f a m i l i a l l a b o r c o l l e c t i v e . 151 For the i n d i v i d u a l to succeed as an independent f u l l - t i m e farmer i n the p r o v i n c i a l s e t t i n g he r e q u i r e d volume and v a r i e t y of produce. This i n t u r n r e q u i r e d at l e a s t f o r t y acres of mixed c u l t i v a t e d land and u s u a l l y an equal or greater amount i n timber stands, n a t u r a l meadow and s a l t marsh grassland. The p r e c i s e amount was v a r i a b l e of course, according to r e g i o n (topography, r a i n f a l l , s o i l type and n a t u r a l vegetation) and r e l a t i v e i n d i v i d u a l s k i l l , energy and ambition. The farm had to y i e l d much more than a f r a c t i o n a l surplus of produce. To be capable of supporting the e n t i r e budget of a f a m i l y , i t had to produce r e g u l a r annual marketable q u a n t i t i e s of g r a i n , meat, h i d e s , wool 9 and hay to be s o l d or traded i n volume l o c a l l y or i n Boston. I f a c o n t r a s t were to be drawn between the needs and c a p a c i t i e s of commercial and subsistence farmers, i t would show that the former r e q u i r e d at l e a s t four times the amount of c u l t i v a t e d land of the l a t t e r and an even higher r a t i o of y i e l d from each acre.\"*\"^ G r a i n , w h i l e u l t i m a t e l y more v a l u a b l e , was not the predominant concern of the commercial farmer l a r g e l y because i t was the most labor i n t e n s i v e of farm-produced commodities and was subject to a great range of u n p r e d i c t a b l e growing and h a r v e s t i n g f a c t o r s . I t shared importance w i t h l i v e s t o c k r a i s i n g . Sheep made up n e a r l y 65% of a l l p r o v i n c i a l l i v e s t o c k and c a t t l e n e a r l y 25%. They each afforded roughly equal f i n a n c i a l r e t u r n to the farmer and were popular because of the r e l i a b i l i t y of t h e i r growth and m a r k e t a b i l i t y . Sheep were cheaper and e a s i e r to manage i n volume and t h e i r l a r g e numbers r e f l e c t e d the advantages of r a i s i n g them. 152 In 1750 there were over 230,000 sheep i n Massachusetts (Table V, p. 40). In f a c t , l i v e sheep, c a t t l e , swine — and t h e i r meats and by-products — and to a l e s s e r degree horses, were the only a g r i c u l t u r a l products that p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts exported i n commercial q u a n t i t y to the B r i t i s h Empire. But even that trade d i d not i n v o l v e s u f f i c i e n t amounts of product to warrant l a r g e c a p i t a l investment i n l i v e s t o c k farming. Moreover, the s o i l of Massachusetts would not y i e l d commercial q u a n t i t i e s of g r a i n ; a f a c t o r that encouraged the predominance of subsistence farming and f u r t h e r retarded c a p i t a l investment i n commercial a g r i c u l t u r e . This p a r t i c u l a r o b s t a c l e to c a p i t a l growth i n r u r a l Massachusetts no doubt i n f l u e n c e d the slow development of new farming techniques and labor use and was an added stimulus to the economic l o c a l i s m and s e l f -s u f f i c i e n c y of the r u r a l communities. But i f the commercial p o s s i b i l -i t i e s of r a i s i n g l i v e s t o c k were l i m i t e d , n e vertheless i t was not unusual f o r a medium-sized commercial farmer to possess a f l o c k of 100 or more. These and the twenty or so mature c a t t l e he would k i l l i n a year provided the f u l l - t i m e farmer w i t h a cons i d e r a b l e amount of winter work. ± x P a r a d o x i c a l l y , the volume that made f u l l - t i m e farming p o s s i b l e , as a year around s p e c i a l t y , a l s o demanded more than a farmer's i n d i v i d -u a l l a b o r . The immediate f a m i l y of the farmer performed the same la b o r f u n c t i o n s as d i d the subsistence farm f a m i l y w i t h the exception that the sons of commercial farmers seldom worked outside the home farm and the daughters r a r e l y , i f ever, became r e s i d e n t domestic servants e l s e -153 where. On commercial farms the male c h i l d r e n and youths a s s i s t e d t h e i r f a t h e r s i n the f i e l d s and barns w h i l e the young females worked w i t h and alongside t h e i r mothers and baked, sewed, spun and made soap and candles, r a i s e d vegetables and performed other domestic and farm-r e l a t e d t a s k s . But the bulk of the e x t r a l a b o r r e q u i r e d on the commercial farm was ad u l t male l a b o r and was obtained by exchange and by short-term s e r v i t u d e . I f these farms d i d c o n t a i n any r e s i d e n t long-term l a b o r i n g servants, a s i n g l e negro sl a v e was normally employed. The major winter work f o r the farmer c o n s i s t e d of tending to l i v e s t o c k , c u t t i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n timber and c u t t i n g and cording f i r e wood, breaking and \" s w i n g l i n g \" f l a x s t a l k s and s e p a r a t i n g g r a i n s , husking corn f o r feed, and r e p a i r i n g b u i l d i n g s and implements. I t d i f f e r e d l i t t l e from the winter work of subsistence farmers except i n terms of volume. Where the part-time farmer was hard pressed to f i n d s u f f i c i e n t and constant work i n the w i n t e r , the commercial farmer spent every day working on h i s p r o p e r t y , or i n work d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to i t . In t h i s and other ways the f u l l - t i m e farmer worked as hard or harder than any labor he might employ. Moreover, r e g u l a r and necessary winter work was both dangerous and uncomfortable. For example, tending to those l i v e s t o c k which were not i n or c l o s e to barns and which might be s c a t t e r e d i n rough winter pasturage or c a r t i n g s u p p l i e s along i n f e r i o r roads, sometimes i n the complete darkness i n the harshest weather. Indoor work, which by proper management the farmer organized f o r the w i n t e r , was d i r t y , tedious and backbreaking; e s p e c i a l l y work 154 w i t h wool, raw h i d e s , f l a x and wheat. In the growing and h a r v e s t i n g seasons the farmer, no matter who or how many he had to help him, worked every day, at the most menial t a s k s , from dawn to dark. A l l t h i s work invo l v e d t i r i n g manual labor and r e q u i r e d r e g u l a r attendance. Often the farmer's own added e x e r t i o n s precluded the need to h i r e at l e a s t one e x t r a hand. The p r o v i n c i a l commercial farmer was a working farmer and not a \"gentleman farmer\" or one who merely organized and supervised the farm o p e r a t i o n , i n c l u d i n g i t s l a b o r . The l a t t e r d i d e x i s t i n t h i s s o c i e t y , but only as extremely r a r e exceptions. In f a c t , f o r an example of the l a b o r i n g h a b i t s of commercial farmers and the usu a l f a m i l i a l l a b o r network they u t i l i z e d , the l a r g e s t farm i n the town of Roxbury, near Boston, i n the 1720s contained s l i g h t l y over one hundred acres of c u l t i v a t i o n and employed only two f u l l - t i m e \" s e r v a n t s . \" The great m a j o r i t y of f u l l - t i m e commercial farmers were men who worked manually f o r an average of 250 days a year, on t h e i r own and t h e i r famxlxes acreages. The commercial farmer derived h i s e n t i r e l i v e l i h o o d from an a g r i c u l t u r a l e n t e r p r i s e that provided h i s immediate m a t e r i a l needs and produced income from a commercially marketed s u r p l u s . Some of t h i s commercial surplus was needed i n the l o c a l community, but only a l i t t l e and only i n some l o c a l i t i e s . The greater part of the commercial y i e l d went to Boston or Salem f o r consumption there or f o r export. As a consequence, many commercial farm operations were w i t h i n convenient t r a n s p o r t a t i o n d i s t a n c e of Boston or another port and c l o s e to access 155 routes. But even l a t e i n the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d the l o c a t i o n of the province's p o p u l a t i o n meant that over h a l f the province's c u l t i v a t e d land l a y w i t h i n t h i r t y m i l e s of e i t h e r Boston or Salem (Map 4) so t h a t commercial farms were d i s t r i b u t e d f a i r l y w e l l throughout those regions and towns. I n e v i t a b l y , there was a higher percentage of commercial farms i n the immediate area of the c o a s t a l p o p u l a t i o n centres but they 13 were not, even here, a dominant f e a t u r e of the landscape. By and l a r g e , the economy of Massachusetts d i d not encourage commercial farming. Extensive l a r g e acreage farming was retarded by the p r a c t i c e of subsistence farming which at once supplied most of the needs of the l o c a l communities. The absence of a cash crop and the higher p r o f i t -a b i l i t y of s e l l i n g or l e a s i n g land f u r t h e r impeded the accumulation of huge c e n t r a l i z e d acreages; the subsistence farm a l s o prevented the formation of a n a t i v e l a n d l e s s farm l a b o r i n g c l a s s . I t bears r e p e a t i n g that a l l t h i s was t i e d to the absence of an exportable high-volume cash crop. Nevertheless, the commercial farm d i d e x i s t i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts and i t and the working, f u l l - t i m e farmer f i t t e d i n t o the l o c a l economies i n important ways even i f t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l and c o l l e c -t i v e i n f l u e n c e s on the community were l i m i t e d . S o c i a l l y and p o l i t i c a l l y , the commercial farmer occupied a higher-than-average s t a t u s ; but he d i d not dominate l o c a l p o l i t i c s or s o c i e t y . He was more important to the l o c a l community i n other ways. The excess produce from these p r o d u c t i v e farms could balance l o c a l demand f o r g r a i n s , hay, meat and hides when MAP 4 156 Towns of Eastern Massachusetts, c. 1770. Approximately 50% of the Province's P o p u l a t i o n and 40% of i t s Towns were Located i n the Area Covered by This Map Source: Cappon, ed., A t l a s of E a r l y American H i s t o r y . 157 re q u i r e d and the l a r g e r farm u n i t and household provided frequent work f o r l o c a l a r t i s a n s . The commercial farm created work f o r many marginal subsistence farmers and l a b o r e r s and sometimes created l i m i t e d term \" s e r v i t u d e \" when that became a recourse f o r some. In these ways i t was u s e f u l without being dominant or r e g r e s s i v e i n terms of i n d i v i d u a l and community labor p a t t e r n s . The l i m i t a t i o n s on i t s s c a l e and the o v e r a l l work d i s c i p l i n e shared by the f u l l - t i m e farmer and a l l workers kept the i n f l u e n c e s of commercial farming at a modest l e v e l . The commercial farmer was s t i l l attached to the wider communal economy and s o c i e t y . For as e f f i c i e n t and s e l f - c o n t a i n e d as i t was, the l a r g e s t commercial farm i n Massachusetts was not even remotely l i k e the economic systems such as manorial tenancy operations and p l a n a t i o n s elsewhere. In some eighteenth century p l a n t a t i o n s i n V i r g i n i a and the West I n d i e s , everything from workshops to l e a t h e r yards to quarters f o r r e s i d e n t 14 l a b o r e r s represented an extreme of a g r i c u l t u r a l c o n c e n t r a t i o n . In p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts the extreme was represented by the working f u l l - t i m e farmer who was perhaps more dependent on the l o c a l community of independent a r t i s a n s and l a b o r e r s than they were on him. The f u l l - t i m e a r t i s a n i n the a g r i c u l t u r a l town was perhaps more unusual than the f u l l - t i m e farmer. By not farming at a l l , at any l e v e l , t h i s a r t i s a n broke w i t h the fundamental p r a c t i c e of d i e t a r y s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y and a l s o stood as a unique exception to the r u r a l labor-and goods-exchange b a r t e r economy. He produced no food, p l a n t f i b e r s or hides and r e q u i r e d only o c c a s i o n a l exchange of l a b o r f o r 158 h i s own s e r v i c e s . Consequently, he d e a l t f r e q u e n t l y f o r cash or b i l l s of c r e d i t . By c o n c e n t r a t i n g a l l h i s time i n h i s trade he was l e s s f l e x i b l e than others and h i s b a r t e r i n g a c t i v i t i e s were diminished.\"'\"^ The f u l l - t i m e r u r a l a r t i s a n was never f r e e to a s s i s t h i s customers or neighbors i n t h e i r farm or r e l a t e d l a b o r needs. I t i s c l e a r that v i r t u a l l y a l l a r t i s a n s i n r u r a l Massachusetts owned land or had access to purchasable or l e a s a b l e farm property. Why the f u l l - t i m e a r t i s a n chose to exempt himself from the customary dual or mixed farm and c r a f t s l a b o r and economic p a t t e r n of h i s f e l l o w tradesman remains a complex question; one that i n v o l v e d p e r s o n a l i t y and socio-economic f a c t o r s that b e l i e d the p r a c t i c e s of the m a j o r i t y of Massachusetts workers. In t h i s s o c i e t y , land was the b a s i c , p r a c t i c a l measure of s e c u r i t y , independence and economic, s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l s t a t u s . The possession of land r e f l e c t e d a f i x e d r e a l stake, i n the a f f a i r s and f u t u r e of the community. The t r a d i t i o n a l and c o n t i n u i n g economic standards of a g r a r i a n s o c i e t y demanded the encouraged i n d i v i d u a l s e l f -s u f f i c i e n c y — f o r the m a j o r i t y t h i s was b e s t achieved by subsistence farming. The c o n j u c t i o n of these two f a c t o r s , the possession of land and at l e a s t the p a r t i a l farming of i t , was a normal imperative f o r meeting the r e s i d e n t i a l requirements of the consensual community. For the a r t i s a n to own land and not farm i t f o r h i s own use, or to be l a n d l e s s and remain so, r e q u i r e d at l e a s t two p r e c o n d i t i o n s : one, that the a r t i s a n ' s c r a f t was i n s u f f i c i e n t demand so that he could 159 best serve h i s own and the community's i n t e r e s t s by p r a c t i s i n g i t to the e x c l u s i o n of farming; and two, that h i s competence and p r o d u c t i v i t y were super i o r to other competitive a r t i s a n s of the same trade and could ensure f o r him a r e g u l a r , constant and f u t u r e demand f o r h i s work. In the area of demand, i t was i n the b a s i c c r a f t s of b l a c k -smithing, shoemaking, w e a v i n g - t a i l o r i n g , carpentry and masonry that the f u l l - t i m e a r t i s a n f l o u r i s h e d . But demand was contingent upon a market of s u f f i c i e n t s i z e and p r e d i c t a b i l i t y to support f u l l - t i m e s p e c i a l i z a t i o n . Hence the f u l l - t i m e a r t i s a n was most o f t e n found i n the l a r g e r than average r u r a l towns of more than 500 f a m i l i e s , or i n towns w i t h i n more h e a v i l y populated r e g i o n s . For shoemakers, b l a c k -smiths and t e x t i l e a r t i s a n s the l o c a l volume of demand was u s u a l l y a s u f f i c i e n t market f o r f u l l - t i m e e n t e r p r i s e ; f o r carpenters and masons, 16 p r o x i m i t y to Boston or Salem was e q u a l l y important. F u l l - t i m e a r t i s a n s were not a common f e a t u r e of a l l communities and t h e i r uniqueness was as much a f u n c t i o n of l o c a t i o n as i t was of occ u p a t i o n a l s p e c i a l i z a t i o n . As many.as one i n four and as few as one i n ten of l o c a l craftsmen were f u l l - t i m e o p e r a t i v e s , and i n some very small communities there were no f u l l - t i m e a r t i s a n s at a l l . John M a r s h a l l , the B r a i n t r e e mason, kept a d a i l y work j o u r n a l from 1688 to 1711; i t provides a v i v i d p o r t r a i t of the l i f e of a f u l l - t i m e r u r a l a r t i s a n . The geographical range of h i s work took him to Boston, Hingham, Weymouth, M i l t o n , M e d f i e l d and Dorchester — towns as f a r as twenty m i l e s from h i s home. He noted that he was contracted to \" b r i c k an oven i n M e d f i e l d , there being no mason there.\" M a r s h a l l began h i s d i a r y : \"Here i s contained i n t h i s book some b r i e f memorials of my own business, how I spend my time, what work I do, and where, some remarkable providences recorded and the weather remembered.\" H i s meticulous notes over a twenty-two year span i l l u s t r a t e the s e a s o n a l i t y of c o n s t r u c t i o n work i n r u r a l s o c i e t y . An.early winter could d i s r u p t the planned economy of the independent a r t i s a n : \"As to November l a s t [1703], i t was a r i g h t winter month. .1 never knew the l i k e f o r f r o s t , snow and tedious weather. I never d i d so l i t t l e work i n November si n c e I knew what work i s \" ; he worked only e i g h t days. But an e a r l y s p r i n g was a boon to the same man; summarizing a m i l d March [1708/9], M a r s h a l l noted: \"This month hath been a very good, comfortable month. I wrought [worked] near twenty days at my trade.\" For most of the winter M a r s h a l l was kept busy preparing m a t e r i a l s f o r the b u i l d i n g season, but t h i s alone d i d not f u l l y s t a b i l i z e the flow of h i s annual income. So he d e a l t i n l i v e s t o c k — not as a subsistence farmer — by buying, f e e d i n g , k i l l i n g and s e l l i n g a few pigs and c a t t l e i n the w i n t e r , i n a barn on h i s property. But winter was a l s o a time of domestic g r a t i f i c a t i o n f o r M a r s h a l l ; he spent more time at home w i t h h i s f a m i l y , attended more Town Meetings and — as a deeply r e l i g i o u s man — took part i n more Church-related a c t i v i t i e s . \" ^ Most f u l l - t i m e a r t i s a n s spent t h e i r e n t i r e working year i n preparing and performing t h e i r contracted o b l i g a t i o n s . For the i n -door c r a f t s such as b l a c k s m i t h i n g , the emphasis was i n m a i n t a i n i n g an 161 even fl o w of work. B u i l d e r s could and d i d encounter s l a c k periods due mostly to weather r e s t r i c t i o n s and were o b l i g e d to arrange most of t h e i r indoor work f o r the winter months. They a l s o used these periods to prepare m a t e r i a l s f o r the b u s i e r summer c o n s t r u c t i o n season. Masons spent the December to March pe r i o d securing m a t e r i a l s , making b r i c k s i n m i l d e r weather, c a r v i n g stone and c u t t i n g l a t h s , w h i l e carpenters stocked wood, sawed and s i z e d standard c u t s , made studs and s h i n g l e s , secured n a i l s , s ealants and p a i n t and r e p a i r e d and replaced t o o l s . To a n t i c i p a t e and secure medium-and long-term f u t u r e work assignments a r t i s a n s had to p r e d i c t the need f o r t h e i r s e r v i c e s , organize t h e i r time and c o n t r a c t s and be of r e l i a b l e p r o f i c i e n c y and r e p u t a t i o n i n order to a t t r a c t f u t u r e demand. The c o n s t r u c t i o n a r t i s a n was not only more g e o g r a p h i c a l l y mobile than the shop craftsman but h i s work c o n t r a c t s were f o r l a r g e r s c a l e p r o j e c t s and i n v o l v e d more formal arrangements. The shop a r t i s a n d e a l t w i t h a l a r g e number of c l i e n t s and r e t a i n e d a h i g h degree of e x t e n s i v e , personal economic r e l a t i o n s w i t h h i s customers. Often, f u l l - t i m e carpenters and masons were away from home f o r days and even weeks at a time when t h e i r work c o n t r a c t s were l o c a t e d at some di s t a n c e from t h e i r residences. A ten-mile s e p a r a t i o n of work and home u s u a l l y negated commuting. T r a v e l by horse, c a r t or coach was not p r a c t i c a l or s e n s i b l e i n the dark or i n bad weather and when f u l l y engaged on a work p r o j e c t , the a r t i s a n u t i l i z e d a l l day-l i g h t hours i n working. Therefore, he might spend cons i d e r a b l e time lodging w i t h h i s c l i e n t . And i f the carpenter or mason chose to spend part of h i s working year i n Boston or Salem or elsewhere where s h i p -b u i l d i n g , shop, warehouse and r e s i d e n t i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n was a constant source of employment, he would be compelled to stay i n i n n s , taverns or boarding houses. For the r u r a l l a b o r e r and some part-time a r t i s a n s , the range of t h e i r working areas was determined by the d i s t a n c e a man could walk i n an hour or so, to and from a place of work i n the morning and evening. Thus the f u l l - t i m e c o n s t r u c t i o n a r t i s a n made s i g n i f i c a n t s o c i a l and domestic s a c r i f i c e s to pursue h i s c r a f t . At the l e a s t , h i s normal f a m i l y l i f e was f r e q u e n t l y i n t e r r u p t e d . While others spent the s p r i n g , summer and f a l l months working at home, or i n the f i e l d s at home or adjacent to home, the f u l l - t i m e carpenter or mason might be ten, twenty or more miles away. Yet these men maintained permanent residences i n r u r a l towns of t h e i r b i r t h or choice and a l a r g e number of them took an a c t i v e and o f t e n important part i n the s o c i a l and 18 p o l i t i c a l a f f a i r s of t h e i r communities. What made these f u l l — t i m e a r t i s a n s d e v i a t e from the more conventional work h a b i t s of t h e i r neighbors was o f t e n simply a matter of personal choice. This choice had to be made and then supported by a f i x e d residence i n the community and a continued p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n i t s : a f f a i r s . As long as the l a t t e r could be maintained, the question of i n d i v i d u a l choice or preference could be r e s o l v e d . Most men made the d e c i s i o n to s p e c i a l i z e i n a f u l l - t i m e n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l occupation f o r obvious economic advantage. Some men,, f o r example, w i t h l a r g e land h o l d i n g s , r e c e i v e d more farm 163 produce by way of lease payments than they might have r a i s e d themselves. A few others found that the equivalent e f f o r t i n c r a f t s work produced more than enough income to purchase farm produce that was normally gained by longer, harder and sometimes unproductive farm l a b o r . S t i l l , the o b s t a c l e s a gainst f u l l — t i m e , non-farm labor s p e c i a l i z a t i o n were many and formidable. The problems of s c a l e and volume were the most pro-h i b i t i v e . R u r a l s o c i e t y contained a great many competing a r t i s a n s who served a f r a c t - i o n a l i z e d market of i n d i v i d u a l customers, w i t h whom they d e a l t d i r e c t l y . For the more s t a t i o n a r y trades such as t a i l o r i n g , weaving and smithing, r e s i d e n t i a l and f a m i l y s t a b i l i t y was not the problem i t was f o r f u l l - t i m e carpenters and masons. But f o r a l l , a knowledge of o r g a n i z a t i o n a l and f i n a n c i a l procedures was necessary to conduct a f u l l - t i m e c r a f t e n t e r p r i s e . Not a l l a r t i s a n s possessed those a u x i l i a r y t a l e n t s . So i t was that f u l l - t i m e a r t i s a n s t a t u s , maintained f o r the d u r a t i o n of a working l i f e , was an ext r a o r d i n a r y occurrence i n p r o v i n c i a l r u r a l s o c i e t y . That i t d i d e x i s t on a marginal s c a l e says something of minor v a r i a t i o n s of p e r s o n a l i t i e s and l o c a l economies. But i t s l i m i t e d presence tends to confirm the general l o c a l i s m of s c a l e and the f l e x i b l e nature of i n d i v i d u a l l a b o r h a b i t s i n the r u r a l economic s e t t i n g . The s i m p l i c i t y of r u r a l l a b o r and economic arrangements overshadowed the i m i t a t i o n of the contemporary marketing p r a c t i c e s of the s k i l l e d a r t i s a n i n Boston, and marked a c o n t r a s t i n work h a b i t s i n 19 the two s e t t i n g s . 164 Yet another group of workers i n r u r a l Massachusetts stood apart from the m a j o r i t y . This group was composed of v a r i o u s l a b o r s p e c i a l i s t s , but they shared common q u a l i t i e s by reason of t h e i r r e j e c t i o n of e i t h e r farming or a r t i s a n s h i p . This c o l l e c t i v e was made up of the small merchants, t r a d e r s , c a r t e r s , bloomery owners and workers, saw, g r i s t and f u l l i n g m i l l operators and v a r i o u s other f u l l -20 time n o n - c r a f t s , non-farm s p e c i a l i s t s . U s u a l l y , most of these business or occupational f u n c t i o n s were conducted by part-time farmers. For example, a subsistence farmer w i t h a good stream on h i s property could e s t a b l i s h a g r i s t m i l l ; i f some occupied land contained adequate q u a n t i t i e s of ore, a farmer might have e s t a b l i s h e d a forge i f he had or could have obtained the e x p e r t i s e . A l a r g e supply of timber on an i n d i v i d u a l p l o t could provide e x t r a work and income f o r a farmer i n chopping, cording and sawing wood, even to the extent of e s t a b l i s h i n g a small saw m i l l . Many farmers engaged i n c a r t i n g as an a l t e r n a t i v e but n o n - s k i l l e d occupation. Indeed, much of the supplementary work and s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the r u r a l community were con-21 ducted by s e m i - s k i l l e d or u n s k i l l e d subsistence farmers. For the most part these occupations, along w i t h the s k i l l e d c r a f t s , supplemented and balanced the l i v e l i h o o d s and work h a b i t s of pa r t time farmers i n the l o c a l economies. But many of these f u n c t i o n s were important enough and s u f f i c i e n t l y r e g u l a r to r e q u i r e or encourage the f u l l - t i m e a t t e n t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l s . Because these e n t e r p r i s e s i n v o l v e d s k i l l s , but not n e c e s s a r i l y c r a f t s t r a i n i n g or a p p r e n t i c e s h i p , they f a l l i n t o a d i s t i n c t i v e l a b o r category. They were e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l p r a c t i c e s , f o r although they were p r i m a r i l y l a b o r i n g a c t i v i t i e s there was a v i t a l element of business o r g a n i z a t i o n i m p l i c i t i n them. Furthermore, a h i g h p r o p o r t i o n of the income of these men was i n the form of cash and c r e d i t b i l l s ; so th a t w h i l e they were conspicuously l i n k e d to the l o c a l b a r t e r and exchange economies, the operators and p r o p r i e t o r s of these s e r v i c e s , l a c k i n g v a r i o u s farm commodities and having l i t t l e or no disposable exchange 22 l a b o r , were o b l i g e d to deal on a narrower b a r t e r range. The f u l l - t i m e saw m i l l operator, f o r example, could o f f e r only h i s sawing s e r v i c e s i n exchange f o r a l l h i s other m a t e r i a l needs. By not possessing a farm, he r e q u i r e d and negotiated very l i t t l e l a b o r as payment. S t i l l , he di d manage to engage i n h i s s p e c i a l and popular s e r v i c e and exchange i t f o r the goods and s e r v i c e s of l o c a l farmers and a r t i s a n s . A great d e a l of the s e r v i c e worker's business was conducted using the m a t e r i a l s s u p p l i e d by customers — t h i s was e s p e c i a l l y true of, m i l l operators — and i n that case h i s s e r v i c e was s p e c i f i c a l l y one of l a b o r . By not r e q u i r i n g e x t r a l a b o r f o r h i s own personal economy, the f u l l — t i m e m i l l e r or sawyer was o f t e n l i m i t e d to accepting cash, or 23 goods f o r h i s own use or f o r r e t r a d e . The n o n - a r t i s a n s p e c i a l i s t s were f u l l y i n t e g r a t e d i n t o the l o c a l b a r t e r systems; and w h i l e i n many cases much of t h e i r incomes was derived from many small cash payments, they d e a l t w i t h a s u f f i c i e n t q u a n t i t y of goods payments to be included i n the predominately non-cash economy. In s h o r t , the s p e c i a l non-166 l a b o r exchange q u a l i t i e s of these occupations s t i l l d i d not exclude them from the general i n t e g r a t e d l o c a l economies. Many of them, l i k e some f u l l time a r t i s a n s , owned and sub-leased farm land to others and r e c e i v e d payments i n farm produce. In the case of m i l l e r s , the s e r v i c e provided by t h e i r l a b o r s was one of converting a raw m a t e r i a l , g r a i n , wood or wool, i n t o a usable product u s u a l l y to be r e f i n e d f u r t h e r by an a r t i s a n . Ironworks or bloomery operators followed a p a t t e r n s i m i l a r to that of m i l l e r s and supplied blacksmiths w i t h metal, as tanners provided l e a t h e r f o r shoe-makers. In some cases the s u p p l i e r s of the m a t e r i a l s and the r e c i p i e n t s of the s e r v i c e were the same persons; as i n the case of the Pearson f a m i l y of m i l l e r s and carpenters who owned extensive woodlots and m i l l e d t h e i r own lumber f o r t h e i r shop and c o n s t r u c t i o n work. Or W i l l i a m B a r t l e t t , a Hampshire county weaver-tailor-farmer who r e c e i v e d raw wool from other farmers i n r e t u r n f o r weaving — as w e l l as producing h i s own — and had a l o c a l f u l l i n g - m i l l prepare that m a t e r i a l i n t o f i b e r s f o r h i s shop. S i m i l a r l y , N a t h a n i e l Chamberlin, a b l a c k -smith, owned a share i n an i r o n - o r e mine and o f t e n s u p p l i e d the l o c a l bloomery w i t h ore, to f u r n i s h i r o n f o r h i s own forge. Some shoemaker-farmers contracted w i t h nearby t a n n e r i e s and had hides from t h e i r own and others' animals \"worked up\" and returned to them as stock f o r 24 t h e i r shops. But o f t e n the supply sources and production ends were un r e l a t e d . 167 In any event, the s e r v i c e operators were i n the f u l l flow of the i n t e r n a l l y - l i n k e d and c i r c u l a t i n g l o c a l economies. Some enlarged t h e i r e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l scope to embrace some r e g u l a r c o n t r o l of supply and demand and to engage i n r e l a t e d or other s e r v i c e e n t e r p r i s e s . A mine owner-cum-forge operator might a l s o operate h i s own cartage and d i s t r i b u t i o n f a c i l i t i e s and s e r v i c e . O c c a s i o n a l l y , a l o c a l s a w - g r i s t -and even f u l l i n g - m i l l might be under s i n g l e f a m i l y c o n t r o l , perhaps supported by a woodlot o p e r a t i o n , g r a i n storage f a c i l i t y and a shearing barn. B r i c k k i l n managers or owners o f t e n a l s o owned or leased lime and c l a y p i t s . The amount of v e r t i c a l and h o r i z o n t a l i n t e g r a t i o n w i t h i n and between s e r v i c e operations was v a r i e d , ranging from n e g l i g i b l e raw-material and d i s t r i b u t i o n c o n t r o l to s u b s t a n t i a l l o c a l monopoly. Again the Pearson f a m i l y serves as an example, t h i s time of l o c a l domination of supply and production. They owned woodlots, and saw-mills and contracted extensive house c o n s t r u c t i o n i n Rowley and Newbury i n Essex county. Moreover, they operated a f u l l i n g - m i l l and a g r i s t - m i l l and processed many of the raw m a t e r i a l s they r e c e i v e d i n b a r t e r f o r t h e i r s e r v i c e and carpentry work. However, t h i s s c a l e 25 and d i v e r s i t y was unusual i n most r u r a l areas. As the v a r i e t i e s of scope and s c a l e were many, these s e r v i c e \" i n d u s t r i e s \" d i d o f f e r some opportunity f o r commercial and business expression, w i t h p r o f i t s being used to expand an o p e r a t i o n , secure some d i r e c t or t a n g e n t i a l aspect of it=or simply to accumulate land i f p o s s i b l e . When leased to o t h e r s , land l e d to an i n d i r e c t p a r t i c i -p a t i o n i n farming, even as a mere source of farm payment i n l i e u of 168 r e n t a l charges. But as l a r g e and extensive as some of these s e r v i c e operations became, the vast m a j o r i t y remained the s i n g l e f u l l - t i m e 26 occupation of i n d i v i d u a l s . As w i t h the r u r a l shop c r a f t s and p r o d u c t i o n , the p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r extended market manipulation were seve r e l y r e s t r a i n e d . D i s t a n c e , a dispersed p o p u l a t i o n and the l o c a l i z e d and b a r t e r economies created balanced competition i n small markets. An ephemeral wage-labor source f u r t h e r c u r t a i l e d the p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r 27 l o c a l or r e g i o n a l dominance or monopoly, except i n r a r e cases. The most notable f e a t u r e of these s e r v i c e trades was that they were c r u c i a l to the l o c a l economies. Demand f o r them was constant over time and was spread w i d e l y through the community so that these e n t e r p r i s e s a t t r a c t e d , permitted and gave f u l l - t i m e employment f o r some workers. Men entered these l a b o r s p e c i a l t i e s because they found that they could e x p l o i t t h e i r lands more u s e f u l l y by u s i n g the p r o p e r t i e s ' n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l resources r a t h e r than by farming or because they lacked an o r d i n a r y c r a f t s s k i l l , or because they d i d not possess any or enough ara b l e acreage to farm. Most of these e n t e r p r i s e s were permanent and i n h e r i t a b l e , of course, but some were b r i e f endeavors — wood stands became depleted, or ore d e p o s i t s were used up or became mechanically i n a c c e s s i b l e . When men remained i n s e r v i c e occupations they d i d so because t h i s type of long-term v o c a t i o n provided a good l i v e l i h o o d , sometimes equal to that of many a r t i s a n - f a r m e r s and u s u a l l y greater than that of the o r d i n a r y laborer-farmer. So long as the a g r a r i a n community and i t s compact economy s u r v i v e d , the c o n t r i b u t i o n of these 169 supportive e n t e r p r i s e s remained necessary and convenient and demand f o r them stayed constant. The technologies of m i l l i n g , mining, f o r g i n g and furnace and k i l n work, along w i t h t r a n s p o r t a t i o n continued mostly unchanged during the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d . So, too, d i d the work 2 h a b i t s and managerial methods of the i n d i v i d u a l workers and operators. The incomes, p r o d u c t i v i t y and combined farm-and shop-work p r a c t i c e s of shoemakers such as Jacob Adams and John Baker were n e a r l y i d e n t i c a l ; though they l i v e d , r e s p e c t i v e l y , at the s t a r t and end of the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d . The range of goods and the methods of production of b l a c k -smiths N a t h a n i e l Chamberlin and James K i n g s l e y were q u i t e s i m i l a r , though these men were separated by a h a l f - c e n t u r y . The i n v e n t o r i e s of storekeepers such as Pyam Cushing and Bayes Manchester, w h i l e f o r t y years a p a r t , were remarkably s i m i l a r ; and the account books of John Hayward and Mathew Noble, tanners,/might be interchangeable, though they l i v e d at opposite ends of the province. The Pearsons operated the same g r i s t - m i l l , without major overhaul or i n n o v a t i o n , f o r over f i f t y years. In Stuart Bruchey's words: f o r the most part market and t r a n s p o r t l i m i t a t i o n s d i c t a t e d that [ i n d u s t r i e s ] be . . . 'neighborhood manufactures,' widely dispersed r a t h e r than g e o g r a p h i c a l l y concentrated, l o c a l manufactures protected by high t r a n s p o r t c o s t s from the com-p e t i t i o n of d i s t a n t producers. They were 'homespun i n d u s t r i e s , ' u t i l i z i n g the t o o l s belonging .to age-old h a n d i c r a f t t r a d i t i o n s . . . and . . . were small i n s c a l e . Furthermore, they were t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y 'backward.' Water power was employed i n the m i l l and furnace i n d u s t r i e s but . . . wheels were undershot and u t i l i z e d only a f r a c t i o n of the water power a p p l i e d to them. 29 170 Moreover, as Charles Grant puts i t , \"most of the non-farm e n t e r p r i s e s were sawmills, g r i s t m i l l s , f u l l i n g m i l l s and t a n n e r i e s . These were p r o f i t seeking businesses but they were a l s o s o c i a l n e c e s s i t i e s i n a i .„ ,.30. r u r a l community. I t i s perhaps d i f f i c u l t to t h i n k of a small merchant, a t r a d e r , stockkeeper, d i s t r i b u t o r and r e t a i l e r , as a \"worker.\" Yet i n eighteenth century Massachusetts, the r u r a l town merchants were q u i t e d e f i n i t e l y workers; c e r t a i n l y i n the broad contemporary meaning of the term which i n c l u d e d • necessary manual work. In a d d i t i o n , the merchants of r u r a l Massachusetts were independent r e s i d e n t i a l t r a d e r s and not t r a n s i e n t pedlars or employed agents of the l a r g e r commercial whole-s a l e r s and r e t a i l e r s of Boston or Salem. W i t h i n the boundaries of the province i t i n e r a n t t r a d i n g by p e d l a r s , mostly from Boston, was forbidden by law and p r o s c r i p t i o n s on t h i s p r a c t i c e were r i g i d l y enforced. The \"Yankee P e d l a r \" of f a c t and f a b l e was a l a t e r phenomenon or one that e x i s t e d o u tside Massachusetts i n the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d . While the l a r g e r merchants i n some of the bigger r u r a l towns d i d maintain con-t r a c t u a l l i n k s w i t h Boston d i s t r i b u t o r s , the f u l l - t i m e merchant i n the i n l a n d towns was e s s e n t i a l l y a c e n t r a l mechanism i n the c i r c u l a t i o n and exchange of l o c a l l y o b t a i n a b l e commodities. U s u a l l y merchandising simply was part of the l o c a l l a b o r and goods exchange economy. As every worker was something of an entrepreneur i n the sense of managing the d i s p o s a l of h i s labor and product, so was he a l s o a merchant i n that he tr a n s m i t t e d a great v a r i e t y of goods i n the course of h i s 171 p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the l o c a l l a b o r and b a r t e r economy. But the l o c a l economies d i d have need of a l i m i t e d number of f u l l - t i m e merchants. The towns would support men who could serve as n e u t r a l handlers of l o c a l goods; commodities that otherwise could not be exchanged f a i r l y or conveniently between other c o n t r a c t i n g workers. They a l s o served to ob t a i n stock and d i s t r i b u t e the l a r g e number of items that came from outside the r u r a l communities, among them wines, s p i c e s , c o f f e e , t e a , sugar, paper, fancy t e x t i l e s , t o o l s , some farm, home and workshop 31 u t e n s i l s and other imported merchandise. These merchants operated the only common r e t a i l f a c i l i t y i n the r u r a l town — the general s t o r e . There, goods could be e i t h e r bought,, s o l d or traded. At t h i s l e v e l the merchant i n r u r a l Massachusetts was not u n l i k e merchant shop keepers everywhere i n the eighteenth century — he was a commodity r e t a i l e r . But beyond that f u n c t i o n h i s r o l e and a c t i v i t i e s d i f f e r e d c o n s i d e r a b l y from those of h i s counter-p a r t s elsewhere. In the f i r s t p l a c e , he re c e i v e d other goods as pay-ment f o r h i s own stock. Second, h i s was a complete \"general s t o r e \" o p e r a t i o n and was not a s p e c i a l t y o u t l e t as were most i n Boston. Most important, the r u r a l merchant-trader was a l s o a worker. His p o s i t i o n as a dealer i n v a r i o u s manufactured items o b l i g e d him to perform r e g u l a r l y a wide range of minor s p e c i a l t y s k i l l e d work f u n c t i o n s . The merchants of r u r a l Massachusetts a l s o o c c a s i o n a l l y doubled as gunsmiths, c l o c k and watch makers and r e p a i r e r s , wood c a r v e r s , f i n e metal workers, 32 v i n t n e r s , cheesemakers, barbers, d e n t i s t s and surgeons. Some were part time t a i l o r s — normally using imported f a b r i c s — weavers or 172 cabinetmakers, or any m u l t i p l e combination of those s p e c i a l t i e s . In f a c t , the great many product and labor s p e c i a l t i e s f o r which the l o c a l economy had some need but not enough demand to warrant the presence of a r e s i d e n t craftsman were supplied by the l o c a l r e t a i l merchants. Many were s k i l l e d bookkeepers and some worked as p r o f e s s i o n a l accountants and as s c r i b e s . Some went so f a r as to provide teaching and l e g a l s e r v i c e s . Most of the work done by these merchants was a s s o c i a t e d d i r e c t l y w i t h t h e i r t r a d i n g p r a c t i c e s ; f o r example, i t was necessary to 33 be able to r e p a i r the r i f l e one made or s o l d . The q u a l i t i e s r e q u i r e d of a merchant i n t h i s s e t t i n g were c h i e f l y those of i n t e l l i g e n c e , above-average l i t e r a c y , manual d e x t e r i t y and v e r s a t i l i t y . In order to be a s u c c e s s f u l r e t a i l e r i n the c l o s e , small economy of the r u r a l town, the merchant had to supplement h i s trade by f i l l i n g the s k i l l e d and s e m i - s k i l l e d gaps i n the l o c a l l a b o r economy. Often those merchants who could or who chose, farmed f o r themselves or d i d o c c a s i o n a l farm work f o r others. Most acquired land as they e s t a b l i s h e d themselves i n the community. A great many merchants were not t r a i n e d i n youth to be t r a d e r s . Many were enter-p r i s i n g l o c a l men who, though t a l e n t e d , had not learned an apprenticed trade. Others were l a n d l e s s men who had perhaps been f o r m a l l y t r a i n e d i n a c r a f t but had found i n s u f f i c i e n t work i n i t to f u l l y support themselves and had turned to performing a v a r i e t y of s k i l l e d s e r v i c e s 34 and had g r a d u a l l y added r e t a i l i n g to t h e i r e n t e r p r i s e s . In p r o v i n c i a l r u r a l Massachusetts, the sons of merchants normally learned a trade, 173 i n h e r i t e d some land and chose dual a r t i s a n s h i p and farming as a means of l i v e l i h o o d . But many remained i n t h e i r f a t h e r s ' businesses — o f t e n one of s e v e r a l sons would be groomed f o r the merchant's l i f e — sometimes expanding where and whenever p o s s i b l e , and o c c a s i o n a l l y branching out 35 i n t o m i l l i n g or some other s e r v i c e a c t i v i t y . The economics of the a g r i c u l t u r a l towns, as constant and continuous as they were, neverthe-l e s s demanded and encouraged v e r s a t i l i t y from i t s workers and t h e i r e n t e r p r i s e s . There were exceptions, of course, and some of them have been noted. The merchant stands as a r a r e case of s p e c i a l i z a t i o n i n t h i s s o c i e t y ; but i t was a s p e c i a l i z a t i o n made up of many smaller s p e c i a l t i e s . 174 NOTES CHAPTER V Jackson Turner Main, The S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e of R e v o l u t i o n a r y America ( P r i n c e t o n : 1965), pp. 21-24; M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 94, \"Muster R o l l s , \" V o l . 130, \"Valuations of Towns.\" The number of f u l l - t i m e s p e c i a l i s t s v a r i e d from town to town, of course. As few as 10% and as many as 40% of workers would devote themselves to a s i n g l e l a b o r a c t i v i t y , and those numbers were determined by f a c t o r s such as s i z e and l o c a t i o n of towns, land a v a i l a b i l i t y and type, and access to raw m a t e r i a l sources. On resource i n d u s t r i e s and l o c a l manufacturing, see V.S. C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufactures i n the United S t a t e s , 1607- 1860 (Washington: 1916), pp. 73-122. A l s o , see Chapter 4, notes 11, 13, 14, i n t h i s paper. 2 There were exceptions but not a great many. For f u l l - t i m e p r o f e s s i o n a l s , see MHS MSS, \"Robert Treat Paine Papers,\" V o l . 1. For l a n d l e s s l a b o r e r s , see Baker MSS, \"Cockerel Reeves Account Book.\" 3 On the matter of v o c a t i o n a l c h o i c e , see MHS Proceedings 1 (1884-5), pp. 148-63 and MHS Proceedings 14 (1900-1), pp. 13-34; Main S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e , pp. 164-196. For s t r i k i n g examples of conscious s p e c i a l i z a t i o n and economic motive, see MHS MSS, \"Diary of John M a r s h a l l , 1688-1711,\" (a mason) and \"Joseph Andrews J o u r n a l s \" (a farmer); Baker MSS 446 P 361, \"Pearson Family Account Books, 1684-1799.\" The l a t t e r was a f a m i l y who f o r four generations operated m i l l s , woodlots, k i l n s and w o b l ^ f u l l i n g and weaving f a c i l i t i e s . 4 R.B. M o r r i s , Government and Labor i n E a r l y America (New York: 1946); Mary Roys Baker, \"Anglo-Massachusetts Trade Union Roots, 1130-1790,\" Labor H i s t o r y 14 (1973), pp. 352-396. Both d i s c u s s la b o r \" p l u r a l i s m \" and \" c o l l e c t i v i s m \" but n e i t h e r sees i t as an e s p e c i a l l y important f e a t u r e of pre-Revolutionary Massachusetts. ^David J . Saposs, i n J.R. Commons et a l . , The H i s t o r y of American Labor, V o l . 1 (New York: 1918), pp. 25-168. 6M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 1, \" A g r i c u l t u r e , \" V o l s . 17-19, \" E s t a t e s , \" V o l s . 40-44, \" J u d i c i a l , \" V o l s . 45-46, \"Lands,\" V o l s . 130-134, \"Valuations of Towns,\" V o l s . 244-54, \"Accounts.\" These volumes, c o n t a i n i n g between them thousands of pages of v a r i o u s a g r i c u l t u r a l data, a f f o r d a comprehensive source of land use, p r o x i m i t y of f a m i l y farm u n i t s , i n h e r i t a n c e and lease t r a n s a c t i o n s and a l t e r n a t e occupa-t i o n a l a c t i v i t y . 175 I b i d . , MHS, \"Thwing Catalogue\" contains a d e t a i l e d and comprehensive g e n e a l o g i c a l summary of the S u f f o l k County Deeds and Probate Court records f o r the seventeenth and eighteenth c e n t u r i e s . \"Joseph Andrews J o u r n a l s \" gives r i c h d e t a i l of these a c t i v i t i e s over a f o r t y - y e a r p e r i o d , approximately 1731-1777. A l s o , see Robert Walcott, \"Husbandry i n C o l o n i a l New England,\" NEQ 9 (1936), pp. 218-252; Anon., American Husbandry (London: 1775); Met c a l f Bowler, T r e a t i s e on A g r i c u l t u r e and P r a c t i c a l Husbandry (Providence, R.I.: 1786). 9 P.W. B i d w e l l and John Falconer, A g r i c u l t u r e i n the Northern United S t a t e s , 1620-1860 (Washington: 1925), pp. 40-48, 132-142. \" ^ B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 115, 126; Main, S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e , pp. 105-6. MHS MSS, \"Roxbury V a l u a t i o n s , 1727.\" A l s o , see Chapter 2, Notes 33, 34 i n t h i s paper. X X A p p e n d i x IV; \"Joseph Andrews J o u r n a l s \" ; B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , p. 135. 12 I b i d . ; \"Roxbury V a l u a t i o n s . \" Of the r e l a t i v e l y few \"gentlemen farmers,\" the best example of t h e i r s o c i a l and economic h a b i t s can be seen i n \"Captain Henry Dow D i a r y \" c i t e d i n H.M. Forbes, compiler, New England D i a r i e s ( T o p s f i e l d , Mass.: 1923), esp. p. 84. 1 3M. Arch. MSS, V o l s . 130-134, \" V a l u a t i o n s . \" 14 For V i r g i n i a p l a n t a t i o n s , see Gerald M u l l i n , F l i g h t and R e b e l l i o n (New York: 1972); For West I n d i e s , see P h i l i p C u r t i n , The A t l a n t i c Slave Trade (New York: 1969); See a l s o \"Joseph Andrews Journals\": M. Arch. MSS, V o l s . 40-44, \" J u d i c i a l \" on work agreements, c o n t r a c t s and produce c i r c u l a t i o n . These references d e a l mostly w i t h breaches of agreements and w i t h i n a p p r o p r i a t e b a r t e r values. 1 5 B a k e r MSS, \"Nathanial Chamberlin Account Book\"; MHS MSS, \"John M a r s h a l l D i a r y . \" Chamberlin, a blacksmith-farmer who derived about 50% of h i s income from h i s c r a f t , u s u a l l y r e c e i v e d about 20% of h i s t o t a l income i n cash and B i l l s of C r e d i t payments. M a r s h a l l , a f u l l time r u r a l mason, recei v e d over 50% of h i s payments i n cash and b i l l s . 176 16 \"John M a r s h a l l D i a r y . \" For the incidence of r u r a l con-s t r u c t i o n workers coming i n t o Boston to work, see BCR, V o l s . 8-17, indexes under \"Trade, C o n d i t i o n Of,\" and \"Tradesmen.\" For example, see V o l . 14, pp. 238-40. On the frequency of f u l l time shoemakers, smiths and t e x t i l e workers i n more h e a v i l y populated regions such as eastern Essex county, see Bruno Foreman, \"Salem Tradesmen and Craftsmen, c. 1762,\" EIHC \"107 (1971), pp. 62-82, and H.W. Belknap, Trades and Tradesmen of Essex County (Salem: 1929). 17 \"John M a r s h a l l D i a r y . \" On the d i s t r i b u t i o n of f u l l - t i m e a r t i s a n s , see B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 130-131. For examples of some very small towns c o n t a i n i n g no f u l l time a r t i s a n s , see M. Arch. MSS, V o l s . 130-134, \"Valuations of Towns.\" 18 \"John M a r s h a l l D i a r y \" contains many poignant examples of the s a c r i f i c e s of commuting and of the extended absences from home of the r u r a l c o n s t r u c t i o n a r t i s a n . M a r s h a l l was very a c t i v e i n l o c a l p o l i t i c s and s o c i o - r e l i g i o u s a f f a i r s . For other examples see Baker MSS, \"Pearson Family Accounts\" e s p e c i a l l y V o l . 2. Some Observations R e l a t i n g to Massachusetts (no author) (Boston: 1750) makes o c c a s i o n a l reference to the p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t i e s of r u r a l a r t i s a n s . A sample of 100 men and t h e i r o c c u p a t i o n a l t i t l e s was taken from MHS \"Thwing Catalogue\" and compared w i t h the same names i n W.H. Whitmore, Massachusetts C i v i l L i s t . . . 1630-1774 (Albany: 1870) and w i t h o f f i c i a l s i n the town records of B r a i n t r e e , Concord, Dedham and Watertown (at MHS). 19 \"John M a r s h a l l D i a r y \" and the r e l a t e d comments i n MHS Proceedings 1 (1884-5), pp. 148-163. On Boston a r t i s a n s , see Chapter VI f f . i n t h i s paper. 20 C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufactures, pp. 73-86, 159-193. 2 1M. Arch. MSS, V o l s . 112-118, \"Towns\"; Appendix I ; \"Pearson Family Accounts,\" V o l . 1. 2 2 Baker MSS, \"Pyam Cushing Labor Accounts, 1739-1777\"; \"Bayes Manchester Account Books.\" On p r i v a t e and p u b l i c B i l l s of C r e d i t see Jacob F e l t , An H i s t o r i c a l Account of Massachusetts Currency (Boston: 1839). 2 3MHS MSS, \"John M e t c a l f Commonplace Book, 1730-1790.\" Baker MSS \"Jacob Nash Account Books, 1705-10,\" \"Pearson Family Accounts.\" 177 24 M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 40, p. 757 f f c i t e s many examples. Baker, MSS, \"Nathanial Chamberlin Accounts\"; \"Pearson Family Accounts\"; \" W i l l i a m B a r l e t t Accounts\"; \"John Reed\"; Jacob Adams Accounts.\" 25 \"Pearson Family Accounts.\" M. Arch. MSS.VVol. 59, \"Manu-f a c t u r e s . \" 2 6 I b i d . , Saposs, H i s t o r y of Labor, pp. 25-77. 27 C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufactures, pp. 87-122, 159-64, 207. Some short-term monopolies f o r resource e x t r a c t i o n and manufacturing were granted by government a u t h o r i t y but these u s u a l l y were intended to encourage l o c a l a c t i v i t y were none e x i s t e d and were not used to suppress e x i s t i n g e n t e r p r i s e s . See M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 59, \"Manufactures\" and Mass. Bay Recs., V o l . 4, and Acts and Resolves, V o l s . 1-5 and Appendices, a l l i n index references. O c c a s i o n a l l y a s i n g l e m i l l i n g o p e r a tion d i d come to dominate a l o c a l area, see \"Pearson Family Accounts,\" but the d i s t r i b u t i o n of m i l l s and forges remained wide and t h e i r numbers high and t h e i r s c a l e s m a l l . See M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 130, \"V a l u a t i o n s . \" On the d i s t r i b u t i o n and l o c a t i o n of m i l l s , see Table I I I . Over 60% of the province's bloomeries (and i r o n ore de p o s i t s ) were i n Plymouth and Barnstable c o u n t i e s , see Appendix IV. 28 On technology, see C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufactures, pp. 164-80. Baker MSS Account Books, \"Jacob Adams,\" \"John Baker,\" \"Nathaniel Chamberlin,\" \"James K i n g s l e y , \" \"Pyam Cushing,\" \"Bayes Manchester,\" \"John Hayward,\" \"Mathew Noble,\" \"Pearson Family.\" Stuart Bruchey, The Roots of American Economic Growth (New York: 1965), pp. 89-90. 30 Charles Grant, Democracy i n the Connecticut F r o n t i e r Town of Kent (New York: 1961), p. 11. 31 On a n t i - P e d l a r laws, see Acts and Resolves, V o l . 1, pp. 720-1, V o l . 2, pp. 47, 232, 385. Al s o see M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 44, \" J u d i c i a l , \" e s p e c i a l l y p. 603. For the independent s t a t u s of r u r a l merchants, see Baker, MSS, \"Bayes Manchester Account Book,\" \"Pyam Cushing Accounts,\" \" W i l l i a m B a r t l e t t Accounts.\" Essex I n s t i t u t e MSS \" W i l l i a m Thomas Accounts.\" For an example of the c o n t r a c t u a l l i n k s w i t h Boston merchants, see Houghton L i b r a r y MSS, \" W i l l i a m P a l f r e y Legal and F i n a n c i a l Papers.\" A l s o , see the merchants catalogues at M. Arch, and MHS. \"Pyam Cushing Accounts,\" \" W i l l i a m Thomas Accounts.\" J J_Ibid_. Cushing was an accomplished \" s c r i b b l e r , \" gunsmith, clock-maker and cheese-maker, and he \" p u l l e d t e e t h \" f r e q u e n t l y . Thomas was a part time schoolteacher and made marketable f u r n i t u r e as w e l l as r e t a i l i n g imported goods. Twice i n h i s l i f e he abandoned merchandising to farm but i n each case he r e t a i n e d some storekeeping accounts. 34 Saposs, H i s t o r y of Labor, pp. 25-168. \"Pearson Family Accounts.\" CHAPTER VI THE COMMERCIAL SETTING AND THE BOSTON ARTISAN A l l trades have f a l l e n i n t o t h e i r ranks and p l a c e s , to t h e i r great advantage; . . . carpenters, j o i n e r s , g l a z i e r s , p a i n t e r s , f o l l o w t h e i r trades only; gunsmiths, l o c k s m i t h s , b l a c k s m i t h s , n a i l e r s , c u t t e r s , have l e f t the husbandman to f o l l o w the plow and c a r t , and they t h e i r trades; weavers, brewers, bakers, <•„ coster-mongers, f e l t makers, b r a z i e r s , pewterers and t i n k e r s , ropemakers, masons, l i m e , b r i c k and t i l e makers, cardmakers . . . t u r n e r s , pumpmakers, wheelers, g l o v e r s , fellmongers, f u r r i e r s are o r d e r l y turned to t h e i r t r a d e s , besides d i v e r s s o r t s of shopkeepers and some who have a mystery beyond ot h e r s , as have the v i n t n e r s . x Thus d i d Edward Johnson d e s c r i b e the workers of Boston of 1647, a mere seventeen years a f t e r the founding of the town. While he admired the o r d e r l i n e s s of the Boston labor economy, Johnson d i d not d i s d a i n the a g r a r i a n s o c i e t y of the m a j o r i t y of Massachusetts workers. His enthusiasm was f o r a balanced economy of commerce and a g r i c u l t u r e and l i k e many contemporaries he saw great s o c i a l and economic advantage i n Boston's commercial and i n d u s t r i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n and a c t i v i t y . Eventually,Johnson hoped, towns l i k e Boston would dot the otherwise a g r a r i a n Massachusetts landscape and the P u r i t a n i d e a l of landed s e l f -s u f f i c i e n c y would be supported by l o c a l commercial and i n d u s t r i a l economies. One hundred years a f t e r Johnson's observations, Boston remained the province's only p u r e l y commercial centre because the o r d e r l y separations of farming and i n d u s t r i a l work that Johnson had foreseenfor r u r a l Massachusetts, had not occurred; there, the non-179 a g r i c u l t u r a l economy was i n t e g r a t e d w i t h the farm economy and most workers took part i n both a g r i c u l t u r a l and n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l enter-p r i s e s . But i f Boston had evolved as an exception to the r e s t of the p r o v i n c i a l l a b o r economy, i t was an important exception. I t s s p e c i a l q u a l i t i e s add a great d e a l to the complete p i c t u r e of p r o v i n c i a l l a b o r . The c h i e f d i s t i n g u i s h i n g f e a t u r e of work i n Boston — i n c o n t r a s t to work i n the r u r a l towns — was that i t had been narrowed to f u l l — t i m e l a b o r s p e c i a l t i e s . The Boston worker d i d not apply h i s l a b o r i n a v a r i a b l e manner, by occupation and season, as d i d the r u r a l worker. Labor i n Boston was organized on a wage and cash b a s i s ; b a r t e r was l i t t l e used. The r e l a t i o n s h i p of the Boston worker to h i s community was h i g h l i g h t e d by that f a c t o r , and the means, con-duct and purposes of h i s labor r e f l e c t e d the p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l con-d i t i o n s which arose from p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a commercial economy. Jus t as i n r u r a l towns work was a b a s i c underpinning of l o c a l s o c i a l arrangements, so too, i n Boston, d i d i t d e f i n e the urban s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e . Although work patte r n s and hence, economic and s o c i a l circumstances were d i f f e r e n t i n the two s e t t i n g s , workers i n both economies a s p i r e d to comparable goals of improvement and s e c u r i t y . While such goals took d i f f e r e n t forms i n the two s e t t i n g s , they were a t t a i n a b l e i n each. In 1750 Boston was a crowded commercial town of about e i g h t square m i l e s and contained n e a r l y 16,000 i n h a b i t a n t s , i n c l u d i n g some 3,000 adul t male workers who l i v e d i n fewer than 2,000 d w e l l i n g s . The town was ringed by over 200,000 l i n e a r f e e t of wharfage and was the s i t e f o r over twenty slaughterhouses, t h i r t y d i s t i l l e r i e s , t h i r t y t a n n e r i e s , about 200 warehouses and ten a c t i v e s h i p b u i l d i n g yards. I t was home port to over one hundred ocean-going cargo v e s s e l s and clea r e d n e a r l y 1,000 dockings and departures annually. Another component of t h i s dense landscape was the presence of n e a r l y 300 2 \"shops\" and \"workhouses.\" Edward Johnson's phrase, \" a l l trades have f a l l e n i n t o t h e i r p l a c e s i \" depicted the degree of l a b o r s p e c i a l i z a t i o n which best s u i t e d the commercial needs of Boston. Furthermore, the working p o p u l a t i o n of Boston, i n Johnson's time and throughout the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , was not only a s p e c i a l i z e d body but was h i g h l y s k i l l e d as w e l l . Although d e t a i l e d employment data do not e x i s t f o r Boston before 1790, the f i g u r e s from 1790 are p a r t l y confirmed by s c a t t e r e d muster r o l l i n f o r m a t i o n from 1756, and can be used as a rough guide to the extent of a r t i s a n s h i p i n the Boston p o p u l a t i o n . Those employment f i g u r e s show that over h a l f of Boston's workers were shop, construc-t i o n and s e r v i c e craftsmen. A f u r t h e r o n e - f i f t h to one-quarter were m e r c h a n t s — l o c a l , r e g i o n a l and i n t e r n a t i o n a l — a n d s p e c i a l t y r e t a i l e r s - a r t i s a n s . Fewer than 20% of the town's working p o p u l a t i o n were \" u n s k i l l e d \" — \" l a b o r e r s , \" \"mariners\" or \"servants\" (Table V I ) . In h i s d e s c r i p t i o n of Boston, Johnson added that coopers, t a i l o r s , tanners, shoemakers, brewers and bakers had by that time formed \" c o r p o r a t i o n s . \" That i s , they had organized themselves i n t o s e l f - r e g u l a t i n g c r a f t s a s s o c i a t i o n s and had been granted c e r t a i n monopoly p r i v i l e g e s . P r i c e s , product standards and d i s t r i b u t i o n had been l e g a l l y r egulated by a c t s of the General Court and the Boston 182 TABLE VI Boston Employment S t a t i s t i c s 1. 1790 Occupational Census ( T o t a l Adult Male P o p u l a t i o n - 2,860) General Category Number Percent Examples of Occupations A r t i s a n s Tradesmen P r o f e s s i o n a l U n s k i l l e d S ervice Mariners F u l l - t i m e Governmen C l e r i c a l 1,271 474 219 188 183 117 : 67 66 44.44 16.57 7.66 6.58 6.40 4.09 2.35 2.31 b u i l d i n g , c l o t h , food, metal, wood and misc. c r a f t s r e t a i l e r s , t r a d e r s , merchants lawyers, m i n i s t e r s , teachers l a b o r e r s (157) barbers, t a v e r n e r s , truckmen in c l u d e s mates, s a i l o r s government and law o f f i c e r s bookkeepers, s c r i b e s T o t a l Employed 2,585 90.40 Others 295 9.60 Gentlemen, 23 (0.80%); R e t i r e d and Unemployed, 106 (3.70%); Servants (w h i t e ) , 63 (2.20%); Poor (no t r a d e ) , 27 (0.94%); Poor ( s i c k , lame), 28 (0.98%); Unemployed, 28 (0.98%). Source: BCR, V o l . 10, pp. 171 f f . 2. Sample of occupations from 1756 Muster R o l l s Category Number Percent Category Number Percent S h i p b u i l d i n g 36 12.58 Carpenter 26 9.09 (Caulker Cooper 26 9.09 Ropemaker Laborer 24 8.39 Shipwright Mariner 18 6.29 Shipj oiner Blacksmith 16 5.60 Sailmaker) Baker 10 3.50 Cordwainer 32 10.48 Barber 8 2.80 T a i l o r 30 10.48 Weaver 8 2.80 Others 52 18.18 T o t a l number i n sample, 286; number of occupations, 33. Source: M. Arch, MSS, V o l . 94, pp. 167-557. Town Meeting. These c r a f t s a s s o c i a t i o n s had not formed \" g u i l d s \" based e x p l i c i t l y on E n g l i s h models because Massachusetts workers were already endowed w i t h the p a r t i c u l a r p o l i t i c a l and economic p r i v i l e g e s included i n E n g l i s h g u i l d s t a t u s . Rather, they, as equal members of the community, had j o i n e d w i t h government a u t h o r i t y to ensure q u a l i t y i n product, p r o t e c t i o n f o r s k i l l e d s p e c i a l i s t s and r e g u l a t i o n of q u a l i f i e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n those r e s p e c t i v e c r a f t s . These c r i t e r i a were seen as necessary mechanisms f o r the s o c i a l and economic s t a b i l i t y of Massachusetts. F i x e d wages, p r i c e s , and reg-u l a t i o n of work, trade and product q u a l i t y were c e n t r a l to the General Court's concern and i t s chartered mandate f o r o r d e r l y settlement, s o c i a l conformity and c o n t r o l and the maintenance of economic s t a b i l i t y . A r t i s a n s , s k i l l e d workers and trades entrepreneurs, as a c t i v e or p o t e n t i a l l y equal p o l i t i c a l members of s o c i e t y were guaranteed f r e e -dom by the Charters of 1629 and 1691 to p r a c t i c e t h e i r v o c a t i o n s . The p u b l i c of Massachusetts was to be protected against excessive p r i c e s , shoddy work, i n f e r i o r product and d i s r u p t i v e , unregulated competition. Frequent, voluminous and s t r i c t l a b o r - r e l a t e d ordinances, e a r l y i n the Colony's h i s t o r y , r e s u l t e d i n c o n d i t i o n s of r e g u l a t e d c r a f t s s p e c i a l i z a t i o n and wage and p r i c e c o n t r o l s f o r the workers of Boston. • These laws, and the i n c e n t i v e s f o r enacting and e n f o r c i n g them, developed from c o n d i t i o n s i n the e a r l y h i s t o r y of Boston. Th e r e a f t e r , the work standards demanded i n the c r a f t s c r e d e n t i a l s of Boston a r t i s a n s were considered l e g a l , a u t h e n t i c and b e n e f i c i a l i n other c o a s t a l commercial towns, and were a p p l i e d e q u a l l y to the r u r a l i n t e r i o r of the Colony. The b a s i s f o r wage and p r i c e assess-ment was the annually f i x e d value of f o o d s t u f f s , u s u a l l y e d i b l e g r a i n produced i n the Colony — and was followed everywhere i n Massachusetts.^ But two p o i n t s a r i s i n g . f r o m Johnson's remarks u n d e r l i n e the d i f f e r e n c e s i n the working c o n d i t i o n s between Boston and the r u r a l , a g r a r i a n communities. F i r s t , Johnson c i t e d the existence of trades a s s o c i a t i o n s i n Boston. Second, he noted the great numbers and v a r i e t i e s of a r t i s a n s who followed \" t h e i r trades o n l y , \" to the e x c l u s i o n of other v o c a t i o n a l p u r s u i t s . N e i t h e r of these f e a t u r e s was p o s s i b l e i n r u r a l Massachusetts. The absence of a \"company\" of brewers or tanners i n say Concord, a town of about 1,200 i n h a b i t a n t s i n 1750, or dozens.of comparable farm communities was an obvious r e f l e c t i o n of both the s i z e of r u r a l populations and t h e i r economic arrangements. Where Concord might c o n t a i n s i x bla c k s m i t h s , Boston because of i t s s i z e would possess upwards of f o r t y . And whereas Concord had no pumpmakers, ropemakers or pewt-e r e r s , Boston's commercial economy demanded s e v e r a l of each. Perhaps f i v e of the s i x blacksmiths i n a g r i c u l t u r a l Concord would not of course, p r a c t i c e \" t h e i r trades only\"; and the f l u i d , s m a l l -s c a l e and p e r s o n a l i z e d exchange of l a b o r , s e r v i c e s and goods i n the farming town made c r a f t s o r g a n i z a t i o n s inoperable. Boston's r e l a t i v e s i z e , l o c a t i o n and commercial economy gave i t a s p e c i a l and unique labor q u a l i t y , i n c o n t r a s t to the c o n d i t i o n s that p r e v a i l e d i n r u r a l communities. What Johnson had discovered and recorded i n the middle of the seventeenth century remained t r u e of Boston i n the p r o v i n c i a l 185 p e r i o d . By 1750 Boston was one hundred and twenty years o l d and i t s s o c i a l and economic character had been f i r m l y e s t a b l i s h e d . Boston's s i z e and the nature of i t s economy, r e l a t i v e to the r e s t of the towns of Massachusetts, were determined s h o r t l y a f t e r the i n i t i a l settlement of the Colony. The town was only b r i e f l y an a g r i c u l t u r a l community.^ Thereafter i t served as an e x i t port f o r raw m a t e r i a l s and some of the colony's few manufactured a r t i c l e s ; i t was a port of entry f o r the steady f l o w of f i n i s h e d manufactured goods from England and elsewhere, and f o r a v a r i e t y of other com-modi t i e s . I t was a p o l i t i c a l , j u d i c i a l and business a d m i n i s t r a t i o n centre. During the e n t i r e pre-Revolutionary p e r i o d , Boston accounted f o r approximately 10% of the Massachusetts p o p u l a t i o n , a c h i e v i n g a maximum of about 15% i n 1650 and again i n 1720, during periods of economic expansion i n the town, and d e c l i n i n g to a low of l e s s than 8% i n the 1760s. Throughout'the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d i t s p o p u l a t i o n was roughly ten times that of the average r u r a l community. 7 Size alone accounted f o r much of Boston's s p e c i a l l a b o r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . The town a t t r a c t e d and sustained f u l l - t i m e workers of a great v a r i e t y of s k i l l s and occupations to serve a l a r g e r e s i d e n t n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l p o p u l a t i o n . Food, c l o t h i n g , s h e l t e r and other v i t a l domestic day-to-day n e c e s s i t i e s could not be produced l o c a l l y as they were i n the v i l l a g e - f a r m l a b o r economy of a g r i c u l t u r a l s o c i e t y . Therefore, i n Boston, bakers, butchers, weavers, t a i l o r s , c a r p e n t e r s , brewers, r e t a i l e r s and others were engaged the year around i n prov-i d i n g those goods and s e r v i c e s which i n d i v i d u a l f a m i l i e s provided themselves, e i t h e r i n whole or i n p a r t , i n the a g r i c u l t u r a l town. The absence of productive a g r i c u l t u r a l acreage meant that Boston i n h a b i t a n t s , of a l l types, had to buy food, and could not supply t h e i r own hides f o r t h e i r own l e a t h e r or the f l a x and wool f o r t h e i r own s p i n n i n g ; nor d i d they have convenient access to timber and other c o n s t r u c t i o n m a t e r i a l s . A g r i c u l t u r a l produce for. the Boston market was provided by i n d i v i d u a l r u r a l s u p p l i e r s who s o l d d i r e c t l y to Boston' commercial d i s t r i b u t o r s . Those fundamental f a c t o r s which created and sustained the system of la b o r and m a t e r i a l s exchange and b a r t e r i n r u r a l Massachusetts, were missing i n Boston. At the b a s i c l e v e l of domestic subsistence, workers i n Boston were r e q u i r e d to buy f i n i s h e d goods from a r t i s a n s and business craftsmen who themselves were r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the a c q u i s i t i o n of purchased raw m a t e r i a l s f o r t h e i r work.^ There were other b a s i c d i f f e r e n c e s i n the work h a b i t s of men and t h e i r f a m i l i e s i n Boston and i n r u r a l towns. In the l a t t e r , the i n t i m a t e s c a l e of l a b o r was f u r t h e r i n f l u e n c e d by a g r i c u l t u r a l c y c l e s so that r u r a l workers' labor p r a c t i c e s were p a r t l y determined by seasonal work rhythms. In Boston, c l i m a t e , weather and seasons obviously had l i t t l e e f f e c t on how a worker conducted h i s c r a f t , l a b o r or s e r v i c e , or how he managed h i s time. For example, the Boston t a i l o r had no need to abandon h i s shop to sow, weed, mow or reap; conversely, he had no cause to p i c k up h i s c r a f t as a means of l i v e l i h o o d i n an \"off-season.\" In Boston, occupations were u s u a l l y 187 narrowed to one e n t e r p r i s e . No matter what h i s employment, the Boston worker,in c o n t r a s t to the r u r a l worker, was subject to l e s s f l u c t u a t i o n of need and a p p l i c a t i o n , and h i s work l i f e was more tuned to d a i l y , p r o j e c t e d and p r e d i c t a b l e h a b i t s . Demand f o r the s e r v i c e s of the Boston a r t i s a n was t i e d to an economic a c t i v i t y that was more cons-tant than that of the r u r a l craftsman; the major i n f l u e n c e s on the work p r a c t i c e s of Boston a r t i s a n s were a l a r g e and f a i r l y s t a b l e con-sumer market, the commercial economy and some competition from other tradesmen.^ Farming provided a common economic underpinning f o r a l l workers i n r u r a l Massachusetts. No such s i n g l e base e x i s t e d i n Boston. A g r i c u l t u r e and i t s a l l i e d a c t i v i t i e s , were the c e n t r a l economic and v o c a t i o n a l determinants of the l o c a l r u r a l domestic l a b o r econ-omies. In Boston, the economic base was l e s s m o n o l i t h i c . The f a c t that i t was predominantly a mercantile-maritime economy d i d not mean that a l l workers were engaged d i r e c t l y i n that e n t e r p r i s e . Trans-shipping and d i s t r i b u t i o n were i t s mainstays. But a s s o c i a t e d w i t h these modes were a number of important economic a n c i l l a r i e s . Boston contained extensive storage and d i s t r i b u t i o n f a c i l i t i e s such as wharves, docks and warehouses. This e n t a i l e d a l i v e l y and substan-t i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n i n d u s t r y . As a s i g n i f i c a n t A t l a n t i c p o r t , the town o f f e r e d employment f o r a l a r g e s k i l l e d l a b o r f o r c e who provided r e p a i r s and a l t e r a t i o n s to l o c a l and v i s i t i n g s h i p ping. The range of other i n d u s t r i e s r e l a t e d to merchant shipping was broad and v a r i e d . Coopering and container manufacture was a notable enter-p r i s e , as were packing and cartage. Indeed, at the middle of the eighteenth century as many as f i f t y s hips were t i e d up to Boston's wharves at any time. Over two hundred cargo v e s s e l s w i t h a combined weight of over twenty thousand net tons were r e g i s t e r e d i n the province and over h a l f of these were Boston based. X^ Shipping and i t s s i s t e r e n t e r p r i s e s c o n s t i t u t e d a c e n t r a l , continuous and p r o f -i t a b l e economic foundation f o r Boston's e x i s t e n c e . That same found-a t i o n a t t r a c t e d and held a l a r g e p o p u l a t i o n which was dependent upon i t as both a source of l i v e l i h o o d and a means to s o c i a l and economic s e c u r i t y and improvement. Farming served to bind the workers and f a m i l i e s of r u r a l Massachusetts to the r u r a l town economies and o f f e r e d long term s t a b i l i t y . By comparison, the m e r c a n t i l e economy of Boston provided the means f o r the s i m i l a r motives of that town's workers and t h e i r f a m i l i e s . In that l i g h t , Johnson's o u t l i n e of work s p e c i a l i z a t i o n becomes c l e a r e r . The merchants who c o n t r o l l e d the economy of Boston sat atop a labor system which fashioned i t s e l f to accomplish the e f f e c t i v e business of m e r c a n t i l e commerce. Two f a c t o r s came t o -gether to d e f i n e that l a b o r system: a locus of business a c t i v i t y which was f i r m l y rooted, and expansive, and a p o p u l a t i o n which was permanent and w e l l tuned to the conduct of m e r c a n t i l e e n t e r p r i s e . In the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , Boston contained between 100 and 200 wharves and warehouses (the terms were sometimes interchangeable) and a male working p o p u l a t i o n that was 1,500 i n 1690 and over 3,500 i n the mid to l a t e 1730s. The warehousing economy alone employed as much as 10% of Boston's labor as c l e r k s , shoremen, boatmen, coo-pers and c a r t e r s . I t provided steady, f u l l time work f o r carpenters, masonsand blacksmiths who b u i l t , enlarged, maintained and improved the f a c i l i t i e s of trade. With an e s t a b l i s h e d economic core that o f -fered employment f o r a l a r g e permanent work p o p u l a t i o n , a s e r i e s of necessary, but dependent, sub-economies f l o u r i s h e d . In the s e r v i c e s e c t o r , t a i l o r s , barbers, wig-makers, p o t t e r s and f u r n i t u r e makers found f i x e d employments and the p r o v i s i o n t r a d e s , baking, brewing and butchering were drawn i n t o the general economy. As these trades became entrenched i n the town, the c o n s t r u c t i o n c r a f t s expanded and took a key r o l e to meet the domestic requirements of the l a r g e r e s i d e n t i a l p o p u l a t i o n and s u b s t a n t i a l numbers of house carpe n t e r s , masons, b r i c k l a y e r s , g l a z i e r s and j o i n e r s were attached to the town's labor economy. The p o p u l a t i o n of Boston grew up around a d i s c i p l i n e d economic base. That economy was one p r i n c i p a l l y of commerce and the workers of Boston had adapted themselves to i t s s c a l e , requirements and op-p o r t u n i t i e s . But w h i l e the s c a l e and f o r c e of the town's m e r c a n t i l e economy were l a r g e enough to pervade v i r t u a l l y a l l aspects of economic l i f e i n the community, that economy d i d not occupy l a r g e numbers of workers i n any s i n g l e common work a c t i v i t y under the aegis of one dominant i n d u s t r y . Commerce created a network of r e l a t e d businesses and a demand f o r r e l a t i v e l y small numbers of s k i l l e d workers i n any one of a wide range of e n t e r p r i s e s . In t h i s s e t t i n g , s p e c i a l i z a t i o n by i n d i v i d u a l s and small groups was the outstanding q u a l i t y of labour. Commerce was a major economic i n f l u e n c e on the Boston worker but i t was by no means the only o u t l e t f o r h i s labor. While manufacturing d i d not reach the s i z e of the trade economy, nevertheless i t d i d exert a s t r i k i n g i n f l u e n c e on the o v e r a l l l a b o r p a t t e r n of the town. S h i p b u i l d i n g , rum d i s t i l l i n g and sugar baking, and leather-work manufacture were o l d and important Boston i n d u s t r i e s . I t has been noted that the r e l a t i v e l y small s i z e of the Massachusetts p o p u l a t i o n and the p e c u l i a r form of the l o c a l subsistence economies permitted only a small and i r r e g u l a r market f o r p r o v i n c i a l l y manufactured products; and no p r a c t i c a l means f o r c e n t r a l i z e d , o r d e r l y production, d i s t r i b u t i o n . and s a l e e x i s t e d or was f e a s i b l e . What the province d i d manufacture c e n t r a l l y and i n q u a n t i t y was mainly f o r export. I t possessed the raw m a t e r i a l s f o r s h i p b u i l d i n g and l e a t h e r manufac-tur e and the molasses obtained i n the West Indian c a r r y i n g trade provided the stock f o r rum and sugar cake. At peak pr o d u c t i o n , ship c o n s t r u c t i o n was an extremely v a l u a b l e source of employment and focus of c a p i t a l investment. In e x c e p t i o n a l years as much as 10,000 tons of shipping was produced i n Boston, f o r c l i e n t s everywhere i n the B r i t i s h Empire. But those were e x t r a o r d i n a r y , i f not r a r e 13 tonnages and were c o n d i t i o n a l on Imperial boom and impetus. Other-wise, the c o n s t r u c t i o n of v e s s e l s , of a l l s i z e s and c l a s s e s , was the main business f u n c t i o n of perhaps ten entrepreneurs who between them averaged 2,000 to 4,000 tons of new shipping annually. That t h i s e n t e r p r i s e would employ some 200 men d i r e c t l y , f o r a l l or part of the year, was of great importance to the a r t i s a n s who depended on steady employment. E q u a l l y notable as a measure of the extent of s p e c i a l i z a t i o n i n Boston, i s the f a c t t h a t t h i s manufacture in v o l v e d 14 up to t h i r t y separate c r a f t s and s k i l l s , workers and s u p p l i e r s . The b u i l d i n g of a s i n g l e v e s s e l of one-hundred tons took s i x months or more and required the s e r v i c e s of a d i v e r s i t y of c r a f t s s p e c i a l i s t s . I n t h i s area of manufacture there was a c l e a r d e f i n i t i o n of s k i l l e d c r a f t s . A ship carpenter was d i s t i n g u i s h e d from a house carpenter and a ship j o i n e r from a house j o i n e r or shop j o i n e r . S h i p b u i l d i n g , perhaps more than any other manufacture or business, i l l u s t r a t e s the degree of c r a f t s p e c i a l i z a t i o n i n Boston and under-l i n e s one of the fundamental d i f f e r e n c e s between s k i l l e d work i n Boston and i n the r u r a l town. Wi t h i n the ca t e g o r i e s of the ship wood-trades there were many s u b d i v i s i o n s : turners and block-makers were s u b - s p e c i a l t i e s of carpentry and carvers were s p e c i a l i z e d j o i n e r s . Caulkers, r i g g e r s and p a i n t e r s were among other p r i n c i p a l s p e c i a l i s t s i n ship c o n s t r u c t i o n . The i n d u s t r y r e q u i r e d many ready-made compr-onents, and ropemakers, sailmakers and chandlers operated workshops as d i r e c t s u p p l i e r s to r i g g e r s and f i t t e r s . The blacksmiths who made and attached the metal f i x t u r e s f o r ships were a l s o s p e c i a l i s t s who narrowed t h e i r s k i l l s beyond general b l a c k s m i t h i n g . Ships were f i t t e d w i t h a wide assortment of unique and p r e c i s e p a r t s and a c c e s s o r i e s and many blacksmiths concentrated on p e r f e c t i n g c e r t a i n kinds of me-r talwork and s p e c i a l i z e d i n making r a i l i n g , or brackets or s p i k e s . A l l these refinements of the c r a f t r e q u i r e d s p e c i a l a p t i t u d e , t r a i n i n g and experience and the existence of a f i x e d e n t e r p r i s e such as s h i p -b u i l d i n g encouraged the refinement of s k i l l s among a r t i s a n s and created a spontaneous demand f o r a body.of f u l l — t i m e s p e c i a l i s t s and s u b - s p e c i a l i s t s . S h i p b u i l d i n g a l s o maintained a small army of l o c a l s u p p l i e r s of wood, p i t c h , n a i l s , b a r r e l s , g l a s s , metal, p a i n t and a host of other raw, bulk and f i n i s h e d m a t e r i a l s . Thus a sub-indus-16 t r y of other s p e c i a l i z e d workers was attached to s h i p b u i l d i n g . Next to s h i p b u i l d i n g , l e a t h e r and l e a t h e r goods manufacturing was another important source of employment. In 1750, Boston afforded f u l l - t i m e work f o r over t h i r t y butchers and these men, who themselves employed some u n s k i l l e d l a b o r , served two r e l a t e d purposes. P r i m a r i l y , they slaughtered c a t t l e to provide meat f o r the l o c a l p o p u l a t i o n and f o r s h i p s ' s u p p l i e s and some export f o r the maritime trade; and they fu r n i s h e d hides f o r the town's l e a t h e r i n d u s t r i e s . ± 7 Hides and some p a r t l y f i n i s h e d l e a t h e r were su p p l i e d to Boston from o u t s i d e the town, from the r u r a l s u r p l uses, but the main source of raw m a t e r i a l supply f o r Boston's l e a t h e r workers was the town's butchers. Some two-t h i r d s of the hides used i n Boston were from beef c a t t l e brought i n t o the town, s o l d p r i v a t e l y or at market and slaughtered by Boston's butchers; the remaining o n e - t h i r d was d e l i v e r e d from the coun t r y s i d e 18 as raw or p a r t l y t r e a t e d or tanned hides. Demand f o r l e a t h e r goods i n Boston and f o r export created a f l o u r i s h i n g i n d u s t r y . Several thousand hides a year were c u r r i e d , tanned, dressed and processed i n Boston. And although the v a r i o u s stages of l e a t h e r work were prac-t i c e d by d i s t i n c t t r a d e s , some Boston t a n n e r i e s i n t e g r a t e d the e n t i r e l e a t h e r r e f i n i n g process i n t o a s i n g l e l i n e a r system i n v o l v i n g per-manent work f o r c e s of up to twenty men. .For example, the l a r g e s t l e a t h e r tanning and manufacturing shop i n p r o v i n c i a l Boston was that of Joseph Belknap who had begun h i s own career as a c o n t r a c t i n g l e a t h e r dresser i n a commercial tannery. By the 1750s, Belknap was operating a complete tannery-manufactory which produced everything from marketed tanned l e a t h e r to gloves, harnesses, breeches, coat s , saddles and even some shoes. He s o l d tanned shoe l e a t h e r to l o c a l i n d i v i d u a l shoemakers and exported b u l k l l e a t h e r to other c o l o n i e s . But w h i l e Belknap's business engaged over twenty men i n i t s operation at v a r i o u s times, he was not r e a l l y an \"employer.\" He provided space f a c i l i t i e s , m a t e r i a l s and markets f o r an assortment of s p e c i a l i z e d independent craftsmen,. The only \"wages\" he paid were to some semi-s k i l l e d \"handlers\" he employed. ..\"The a r t i s a n s i n h i s o p e r a t i o n were contracted to work at t h e i r own s p e c i a l t i e s , on a \"piece-work\" b a s i s f o r s p e c i f i c q u a n t i t i e s or periods of time, w h i l e they accumulated c a p i t a l and developed r e t a i l contacts to e s t a b l i s h t h e i r own small t a n n e r i e s or production shops. Outer work c l o t h i n g , saddles and harnesses, boots, shoes and gloves were the major items produced by Boston's l e a t h e r i n d u s t r y . I t i s d i f f i c u l t to estimate what p r o p o r t i o n of these products.was used d o m e s t i c a l l y , i n Boston and the prov i n c e , and how much was ex-ported. But Boston's glovers and shoemakers d i d supply stock f o r shipment to other mainland American c o l o n i e s and to the West Indies 194 and probably marketed more i n those places than they d i d i n r u r a l Massachusetts, where l o c a l craftsmen s a t i s f i e d most of the l o c a l demands. Gloves were a p o s s i b l e exception; most r u r a l leatherworkers di d not appear to be i n t e r e s t e d i n glovemaking. .j.But the export r u l e a p p l i e d to footwear and the overseas market, which took 9,000 p a i r s of shoes annually i n the 1750s, was as important as the Boston market. Dressed or tanned hides were the main l e a t h e r commodity shipped from Boston to the Empire. Leather work was a c o n s i s t e n t and peren-n i a l e n t e r p r i s e i n p r o v i n c i a l Boston and occupied a s i g n i f i c a n t min-20 o r i t y of the working p o p u l a t i o n . I t was organized and patterned by sub-processes i n t o a phased method of manufacture, so that d r e s s e r s , tanners and curers each conducted t h e i r stages of the process inde-pendently. In that way, as a f i x e d economic a c t i v i t y and subdivided by c r a f t , i t was operated and c o n t r o l l e d by many, separate f u l l - t i m e s p e c i a l i s t s . I t was, t h e r e f o r e , not so much a s i n g l e i n d u s t r y as 21 a composite of s e v e r a l i n d u s t r i e s i n many independent hands. The s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h i s arrangement was that i n d i v i d u a l workers, and not merchants or i n v e s t o r s , determined the methods of l e a t h e r manu-f a c t u r i n g i n Boston. Even though he was producing l a r g e l y f o r an impersonal market, the l e a t h e r worker, l i k e the r u r a l a r t i s a n , r e t -ained a great deal of c o n t r o l over the d i s p o s a l of h i s l a b o r . The t h i r d major export manufacturing sector i n Boston was d i s t i l l i n g , and i n i t s own way was more c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to the town's me r c a n t i l e economy than were e i t h e r s h i p b u i l d i n g or l e a t h e r production. Merchants i n the town c o n t r o l l e d the supply and ownership of molassses They were a l s o key f a c t o r s i n the export and s a l e of rum. And many of the community's s t i l l s and sugar-baking shops were owned by t r a d -ing merchants. Nevertheless because rum was popular and commercially p r o f i t a b l e , and was d i f f i c u l t to make on a domestic s c a l e , d i s t i l l i n g was a buoyant manufacturing e n t e r p r i s e f o r many a r t i s a n s i n p r o v i n c i a l Boston. As many as f o r t y s t i l l houses operated i n the town i n some years, and throughout the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , e s p e c i a l l y a f t e r 1710, 22 an average of t h i r t y s t i l l s produced rum. An ord i n a r y eighteenth century commercial d i s t i l l e r y , i n c l u d i n g c a s k - f i l l i n g and storage, could be operated by two or three s k i l l e d men. While many s t i l l s were owned by merchants who contracted master d i s t i l l e r s , many of the l a t t e r d i d progress to o b t a i n t h e i r own f a c i l i t i e s . But i f the many s t i l l s of Boston d i d f u n c t i o n as one, two or three man operations t h e i r c o l l e c t i v e presence provided steady work f o r another l a r g e num-23 ber of r e l a t e d s k i l l e d s p e c i a l i s t s . Coopers were i n d i s p e n s i b l e to rum production and storage and shipment; a corps of these tradesmen were permanently attached to the d i s t i l l i n g i n d u s t r y . S p e c i a l i s t coopers made, maintained and re p a i r e d the vat s and v e s s e l s of the s t i l l s w h i l e others manufactured the casks, b a r r e l s and hogsheads r e q u i r e d f o r storage and transpor-t a t i o n . As d i s t i l l i n g was c l o s e l y a l l i e d to Boston's r o l e as a commercial p o r t , coopers represented a d i r e c t l i n k between the town's manufacturing sector and i t s m e r c a n t i l e economy. The cooper was popular throughout the economy of p r o v i n c i a l Boston. The storage 196 and shipping technology of the age made h i s s p e c i a l s k i l l s c r u c i a l to both manufacturing and the export of raw and f i n i s h e d goods. The d i s t i l l e r was h e l p l e s s without the cooper and each ship b u i l t i n Boston was f i t t e d w i t h storage b a r r e l s b u i l t and i n s t a l l e d by l o c a l coopers. Boston merchants shipped rum, s a l t , meat and f l o u r i n l o c a l l y made b a r r e l s and. each ship c a r r i e d i t s food and water s u p p l i e s i n casks and b a r r e l s fashioned by Boston coopers. The merchants a l s o traded i n new, empty b a r r e l s and i n the component p a r t s of b a r r e l s : 24 hoops, staves and tops, a l l the produce of coopers. In view of t h e i r widespread i n f l u e n c e and t h e i r importance to the l o c a l economy, and the consequent n e c e s s i t y f o r h i g h and c o n s i s t e n t standards, coopers were among the most c l o s e l y r e g ulated — i n terms of product q u a l i t y — of Boston's a r t i s a n s , along w i t h bakers and l e a t h e r workers. But they were a l s o the best organized, i n terms of cooper-a t i o n to secure raw m a t e r i a l s and i n s e l f - r e g u l a t e d c o n t r o l of the numbers of coopers, r e l a t i v e to demand. Yet i n the midst of t h e i r c o l l e c t i v i s m and mutual p r o t e c t i o n i s m , coopers remained supremely independent. Few of them c o l l a b o r a t e d i n p a r t n e r s h i p s or small com-panies i n order to e x p l o i t the market by monopoly or systematic volume production. The t y p i c a l cooperage i n Boston was a one-man shop r e p l e t e w i t h the t o o l s and f a c i l i t i e s f o r c u t t i n g , shaping, bending and t r e a t i n g wood and f a b r i c a t i n g complete b a r r e l s and other c o n t a i n e r s . There was no d i s t i n c t i o n , or s u b - r s p e c i a l i z a t i o n , between 25 \"dry\" and \"wet\" cooperage. 197 S h i p b u i l d i n g , l e a t h e r production and d i s t i l l i n g were sustained by a concentrated l o c a l market and a f a i r l y constant export demand. They had developed i n t o permanent f e a t u r e s of the economy of p r o v i n -c i a l Boston and, l i k e maritime tra d e , were of s u f f i c i e n t s c a l e and pe r s i s t e n c e to promote the presence of l a r g e numbers of a r t i s a n s of d i v e r s e t a l e n t s , s k i l l s and f u n c t i o n s . Moreover, the d u r a b i l i t y of these economic e n t e r p r i s e s ensured that perceived economic and voc-a t i o n a l c o n d i t i o n s were tra n s m i t t e d from one generation of workers to the next. Thus, Boston was not merely an economic and v o c a t i o n a l v a r i a t i o n of the s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n s of r u r a l Massachusetts. I t s i n d u s t r i a l and commercial economy had shaped a set of work pa t t e r n s that d i f f e r e d r a d i c a l l y from those of r u r a l Massachusetts; the absence of a personal subsistence base such as the f a m i l y farm was a p r i n c -i p a l cause of labor s p e c i a l i z a t i o n i n Boston. But the f u l l - t i m e p r o s e c u t i o n of t h e i r c r a f t s were as meaningful to the workers of Boston as were the mixed o c c u p a t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the r u r a l t r a d i t i o n , to the subsistence farmer. Both sets of labor a c t i v i t i e s shared a common value: t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e exponents considered them as being permanent and t r a n s f e r r a b l e to oth e r s . The commercial e n t e r p r i s e s of Boston were complete processes, from the treatment of raw m a t e r i a l s to the f a s h i o n i n g of a f i n i s h e d product. C e r t a i n l y economic f l u c t u a t i o n d i d a f f e c t the l e v e l of productive manufacture and the amount of trade from year to year and from decade to decade, but Boston's p r i n c i p a l employment e n t e r p r i s e s r e t a i n e d t h e i r permanent q u a l i t i e s . When the town's growth ceased 198 a f t e r 1740 and d i d not resume u n t i l a f t e r 1780, i t s economic base s t a b i l i z e d r a t h e r than expanded and the e s t a b l i s h e d employment bases remained h i g h l y a c t i v e and d i d not d e c l i n e to the end of the p r o v i n -c i a l p e r i o d . The fundamental nature of work i n the town and the character and s t y l e of the town's a r t i s a n s were not a f f e c t e d by the s t a b i l i z a t i o n of the town's s i z e . The s c a l e and v a r i e t i e s of Boston's i n d u s t r i e s were such that the Boston a r t i s a n was r e q u i r e d to e x e r c i s e h i s c r a f t i n a f u l l - t i m e occupation; i t was u s u a l l y necessary f o r him 2 6 to develop and p r a c t i c e a f u r t h e r s p e c i a l i z a t i o n . P r o v i n c i a l Boston's economy was not m o n o l i t h i c , but i t s com-ponent e n t e r p r i s e s were c l o s e l y l i n k e d . The i n d u s t r i e s o u t l i n e d above can not be seen as wholly d i s t i n c t and un r e l a t e d branches of the town's economy. For a s t a r t , the c a p i t a l f o r the prosecution of Boston's manufacturing and m e r c a n t i l e i n d u s t r i e s came l a r g e l y from the r e s i d e n t merchant community. These merchants, businessmen, agents and i n v e s t o r s a l s o c o n t r o l l e d the means f o r the d i s t r i b u t i o n of the exported product of Boston's commerce. Trading merchants o f t e n owned ship yards or s t i l l s or tan yards and sometimes served as independent or r e p r e s e n t a t i v e buyers of new s h i p s , stocks of rum or timber or l e a t h e r . As the m a j o r i t y of ships b u i l t i n Massachusetts were f o r export to r e g i s t r y elsewhere, the Boston merchants, w i t h t h e i r business s k i l l s and t h e i r money or c r e d i t c o n t a c t s , were v i t a l i n the p r o v i s i o n and procurement of c o n s t r u c t i o n c o n t r a c t s and s c a l e s . Even the manufacturing economy of Boston, though i t d i d f u n c t i o n as an autonomous i n d u s t r i a l s e c t o r , and was comprised of many d i s c r e t e i n d u s t r i e s and p r a c t i t i o n e r s , was thoroughly 199 connected, i f not a u x i l l i a r y to the me r c a n t i l e economy of the town. The workers of Boston were woven i n t o a broad-based economy. The a r t i s a n s who b u i l t the s h i p s , made the run, or produced l e a t h e r goods or wood products were dependent upon the l o c a l merchants' market connections and c a p i t a l . There were other overlaps i n the work p a t t e r n s . The s e v e r a l hundred seamen who manned Boston-registered t r a d i n g v e s s e l s were home f o r part of each year or i n a l t e r n a t e years, between voyages and c o n t r a c t s . When ashore these s a i l o r e engaged i n sedentary occupa-t i o n s . They helped i n the marginal, u n s k i l l e d work a s s o c i a t e d w i t h s h i p b u i l d i n g and the t a n n e r i e s , warehouses, workshops, docks and p u b l i c works of the town. A f u r t h e r example of t h i s was the c a r t e r s . Normally, c a r t e r s provided overland t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f o r the m a t e r i a l s of the m e r c a n t i l e economy, that i s , the t r u c k i n g involved i n maritime tra d e , the c a r r i a g e of export goods i n t o Boston's wharves and the imported items w i t h i n and beyond the town. Often, when wharf demand was s l u g g i s h , they a l s o served the manufacturing sec t o r w i t h t h e i r s k i l l s , equipment, connections and time. In these ways, the town's va r i o u s l a b o r and economic a c t i v i t i e s were connected and shared. Money that was made i n trade was o f t e n invested i n l o c a l manufacturing and m a t e r i a l supply, thereby c r e a t i n g a need f o r l o c a l a r t i s a n s who were i n t u r n supported 27 by an e l a s t i c l a b o r and s e r v i c e work po p u l a t i o n . Trade and commerce had helped fund and s t i m u l a t e some l o c a l manufacture and together had formed an enduring economic foundation f o r Boston. The combined mercantile-manufacturing economy and the pop u l a t i o n i t supported generated a considerable domestic and s e r v i c e economy. I t i s not p o s s i b l e to determine a c c u r a t e l y the r e l a t i v e numbers of a r t i s a n s i n v o l v e d i n e i t h e r the m e r c a n t i l e and export manufacturing economy or the l o c a l market economy. But i t i s l i k e l y that a m a j o r i t y of Boston's a r t i s a n s were attached to the pu r e l y l o c a l economy which supplied the goods, s e r v i c e s and c o n s t r u c t i o n f o r the r e s i d e n t 28 p o p u l a t i o n . The l e v e l of organized u t i l i t y of s k i l l s and s p e c i a l i t i e s that was present i n manufacturing was r e p l i c a t e d i n : l o c a l i z e d s e r v i c e s . These s e r v i c e s were provided by a r t i s a n s who fur n i s h e d Boston's house-h o l d , c i v i c and wholly l o c a l , commercial work and supplied commodities to the l o c a l market. They were, i n many cases, men of s i m i l a r trades backgrounds to those i n manufacturing and e x p o r t - r e l a t e d work. In the high-volume c r a f t s of metal, wood and l e a t h e r work, the domestic a r t i s a n could support a f u l l - t i m e s p e c i a l i z a t i o n . For example, the carpenter who worked i n the s h i p b u i l d i n g i n d u s t r y u s u a l l y d i d l i t t l e or no house carpentry and l e f t that f i e l d open to the house c o n s t r u c t i o n s p e c i a l i s t . S i m i l a r l y , a bla c k s m i t h who made and i n s t a l l e d ship f i x t u r e s normally d i d not shoe horses or make and r e p a i r household implements. Some shoemakers concentrated t h e i r e f f o r t s on pre-manufacture f o r export w h i l e others were employed e n t i r e l y i n l o c a l custom work. That form of c r a f t s s p e c i a l i z a t i o n represented only one marked d i v i s i o n of trades work. There were, i n Boston, l a r g e numbers of a r t i s a n s whose s p e c i a l i t i e s were p r i m a r i l y s u i t e d to the domestic economy. Home baking was a l i m i t e d venture i n the s m a l l , crowded 201 houses and apartments of Boston's workers, and commercial baking, un-known i n r u r a l Massachusetts, was a s u b s t a n t i a l Boston e n t e r p r i s e . The p h y s i c a l l i m i t a t i o n s of the Boston tenement k i t c h e n were compounded by the d i f f i c u l t y i n o b t a i n i n g f u e l and f l o u r . Although there were p u b l i c g r a n aries i n Boston, the town's commercial bakers had primary access to the town's g r a i n and f l o u r s u p p l i e s . They baked the b i s c u i t s f o r the l o c a l merchant f l e e t and combined t h i s a c t i v i t y w i t h the l u c r a t i v e domestic market f o r bread. Commercial baking had e x i s t e d i n Boston from the mid-seventeenth century and had grown to r e p l a c e a good d e a l of the home baking i n the town. But i t d i d not represent a hardship or r e s t r i c t i o n of s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t y on the l o c a l p o p u l a t i o n . The c e s s a t i o n of widespread home baking i n the town was roughly c o i n c i d e n t a l w i t h Boston's s h i f t from mixed a g r i c u l t u r e and commerce to an a b s o l u t e l y n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l economy. The process was h u r r i e d by the high cost and i r r e g u l a r a v a i l a b i l i t y of f u e l . By the middle of the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , the p r a c t i c e of buying bread was a matter of long 29 e s t a b l i s h e d f o r m a l i t y f o r Boston's workers. Baking serves as an example of the c o m m e r c i a l i z a t i o n of many household l a b o r economies. Brewing, weaving, soap, candle and c l o t h e s -making were among domestic e n t e r p r i s e s that were gone from many of Boston's homes long before the end of the seventeenth century, w h i l e they remained mainstays of the r u r a l household throughout the p r o v i n c i a l 30 p e r i o d . There were obvious m a t e r i a l and l o g i s t i c a l reasons f o r t h i s , of course. In 1740, some 5,000 persons were crowded i n t o an area of north-end Boston that measured l e s s than one square m i l e . The average 202 pop u l a t i o n d e n s i t y of the towns of eastern Massachusetts at t h i s time was l e s s than t w e n t y - f i v e per square m i l e . There were fewer than t h i r t y m i l k cows i n north-end Boston's four wards and only a s c a t t e r i n g of small garden p l o t s . M a t e r i a l s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y was a n a t u r a l con-d i t i o n of subsistence farming and was i l l u s t r a t e d by the f a c t that r u r a l towns of only 1,000 r e s i d e n t s contained an average of f i v e m i l l s — of assorted types — where l o c a l i n h a b i t a n t s had t h e i r own m a t e r i a l s processed f o r t h e i r own uses. In Boston, i n the l a t e p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , there were only ei g h t m i l l s — four of them saw m i l l s — to serve the town. Normally, Boston householders d i d not have access to raw m a t e r i a l s but even i f they d i d have some stock, there were no l o c a l p rocessing f a c i l i t i e s , such as g r i s t or saw m i l l s , f o r them to use. Therefore, i n Boston, raw m a t e r i a l s were purchased i n wholesale q u a n t i t i e s by the town's r e t a i l craftsmen, s u p p l i e r s and manufacturers, from r u r a l s u r p l u s e s , and converted i n t o f i n i s h e d items and so l d to l o c a l consumers. Quite simply, the m a t e r i a l s — such as g r a i n s , h i d e s , wool and lumber — re q u i r e d f o r the production of b a s i c home u t i l i t i e s , and the space to conduct manufacture, were not r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e to many Boston workers. L i v i n g quarters were s m a l l e r and much more crowded than those i n r u r a l d w e l l i n g s ; tenement houses i n north-end Boston contained s l i g h t l y over ten people on the average, w h i l e the usual pop u l a t i o n of the l a r g e r eastern r u r a l Massachusetts house was l e s s 31 than 7.6. Even i f m a t e r i a l s were acquired, by trade or purchase i n Boston, there was a f u r t h e r d i s i n c e n t i v e to produce goods f o r personal 203 home consumption because of the o f f i c i a l c o n t r o l s that kept p r i c e s s t a b l e and s u p p l i e s r e g u l a r . This was an accepted c o n d i t i o n of l i f e i n Boston and the a b d i c a t i o n by many Bostonians, of o r d i n a r y pre-i n d u s t r i a l household manufacturing r e s u l t e d from a combination of d i f f i c u l t y i n household production and ease of r e t a i l purchase. I t a l s o marked a f u r t h e r d i s t i n c t i o n i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n of work and the nature of market p r a c t i c e s between the r u r a l and the Boston communities. The independent worker i n p r o v i n c i a l Boston d i d not see, and was not forced to accept, the disappearance of domestic s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y i n the face of sudden or encroaching commercial marketing and urban crowding. This c o n d i t i o n had been part of the Boston s o c i a l , economic 32 and work environment f o r generations. A s i g n i f i c a n t household l a b o r p r a c t i c e which d i d endure i n g e n e r a l , i n Boston, was home sp i n n i n g . But even here, the yarns produced at home by wives and daughters were made from purchased or contracted f l a x and wool and were not always used to provide f a b r i c s f o r home-made personal c l o t h i n g ; normally, they were s o l d to commercial weavers or t a i l o r s to supplement the f a m i l y 33 income. The labor economy of Boston was a wage exchange economy. A p a r a l l e l development of trades and o c c u p a t i o n a l s p e c i a l i z a t i o n i n the non-agrarian s e t t i n g was the absence of the b a r t e r medium of l a b o r and commodity exchange. Money and b i l l s of c r e d i t replaced the l a t t e r . There was some p e r i p h e r a l b a r t e r i n g i n Boston, and, when convenient, workers exchanged l a b o r , r e s p e c t i v e s k i l l e d s e r v i c e s , or items of t h e i r own produce or possession. But such exchanges were l i m i t e d by 204 the f a c t that most a r t i s a n s i n Boston e x i s t e d w i t h i n the s t r i c t con-f i n e s of t h e i r labor s p e c i a l t y . That s p e c i a l t y was d i r e c t e d to a s p e c i f i c v o c a t i o n a l end and consumed the greatest p o r t i o n of the worker's time and a t t e n t i o n . There was no a g r i c u l t u r e w i t h which to produce ne g o t i a b l e s t a p l e m a t e r i a l s and commodities f o r b a r t e r . There was, i n s h o r t , very l i t t l e chance and need f o r la b o r f l u i d i t y and l i t t l e v e r s a t i l i t y . Because of t h i s , l a b o r and economic r e l a t i o n s h i p s and 34 contacts were more impersonal than they were i n the r u r a l communities. To a l a r g e extent, the household s t a p l e s f o r Boston were pro-vided by a r e t a i l economy. The shops and workhouses of Boston were s p e c i a l t y operations and were occupied by bakers, brewers, shoemakers, j o i n e r s , furniture-makers, weavers, t a i l o r s , blacksmiths and many others who supplied the everyday m a t e r i a l requirements of the p o p u l a t i o n . These shops and workhouses included the more \" i n d u s t r i a l \" e s t a b l i s h -ments such as ropewalks (works), s a i l l o f t s , g l a s s works, cooperages, tanneri e s and leather-work shops. They included s t r i c t l y r e t a i l shops too, where l o c a l and imported merchandise was s o l d d i r e c t to consumers. There were c l o t h i n g shops, taverns, v i c t u a l e r s , bookshops, j e w e l r y shops, household merchandise sto r e s ( s e l l i n g candles, soap, bedding, kitchenware and pottery) and other r e t a i l o u t l e t s which s o l d pre-35 stocked goods to a dependent po p u l a t i o n . The town's p u b l i c market supplied farm produce and permitted s t a l l s to be set up by an assortment of \"hucksters,\" small merchants and r e t a i l i n g a r t i s a n s . The s p e c i a l i z a t i o n that e x i s t e d i n the general a r t i s a n p o p u l a t i o n extended to these work and r e t a i l shops. Outside the p u b l i c market, most of the tradesmen who d i d r e t a i l d i r e c t l y to the p u b l i c , such as shoemakers and c l o t h i e r s , combined t h e i r operations i n one l o c a t i o n . And among the scores of b l a c k s m i t h s , shoemakers, t a i l o r s and bakers who d e a l t w i t h the l o c a l market, were some more e x o t i c c r a f t s : wigmakers, gold and s i l v e r smiths, watchmakers, gunsmiths, armorers, staymakers, l o c k s m i t h s , japanners, wood c a r v e r s , s a d d l e r s , h a t t e r s , s c r i b e s , bookkeepers and v i n t n e r s . Work that was done by part-time farmers i n r u r a l Massachusetts became the s o l e a c t i v i t y of a Boston a r t i s a n . The general s t o r e of the r u r a l town became the s p e c i a l t y shop of a Boston r e t a i l e r . As money and c r e d i t b i l l s r e -placed b a r t e r i n Boston, they became \"commodities\" i n themselves and were used, not only as \" c a p i t a l mechanisms,\" but as a l t e r n a t i v e s to lab o r and s t a p l e exchange and b a r t e r . In these s i g n i f i c a n t ways, s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y i n Boston was measured i n terms of s u c c e s s f u l s p e c i a l -i z a t i o n and the possession of c a p i t a l , and not i n l a b o r f l e x i b i l i t y and self-produced m a t e r i a l subsistence. In Boston there were l a b o r e r s who s p e c i a l i z e d i n chimney-sweeping; blacksmiths who had r e f i n e d t h e i r s p e c i a l i t i e s to become toolmakers, or c u t l e r s ; j o i n e r s who made only f u r n i t u r e , or coaches or c h a i r s ; brickmakers who became p o t t e r s , making d i s h e s , cups and bowls; carpenters who made only shoe h e e l s , or c a r t s and wagons; masons who s p e c i a l i z e d i n p l a s t e r i n g or chimney work; and wheelwrights who made only spinning wheels or only c a r t wheels, or only m i l l w h e e l s . ^ 206 Some t a i l o r s , shoemakers, coopers and j o i n e r s , among othe r s , d i d \"set work\" f o r t h e i r own or another's r e t a i l stock or, l i k e h e e l makers, made s p e c i a l t y p a r t s f o r assembly elsewhere. B r i c k , n a i l , l a t h , h e e l and candle makers, sawyers, brewers, weavers and p o t t e r s d i d more \"set work\" f o r an unknown, unseen c l i e n t e l e , then they d i d bespoke or 37 d i r e c t custom work. Moreover, among c e r t a i n a r t i s a n groups there was evidence of another form of s p e c i a l i z a t i o n , i n c o n t r a s t to r u r a l Massachusetts. T a i l o r s , shoemakers and l e a t h e r f i n i s h e r s o f t e n narrowed t h e i r work to s u i t a s p e c i f i c economic or s o c i a l c l a s s . Most t a i l o r s d i d make c l o t h i n g f o r a l l c l a s s e s : the prospering merchant could have an el a b o r a t e , f a s h i o n a b l e and expensive s u i t of c l o t h e s made f o r him by a t a i l o r who a l s o made p l a i n c l o t h i n g f o r a r t i s a n s or could f u r n i s h the merchant's s l a v e , servant or apprentice w i t h both work c l o t h i n g and a \"dress\" s u i t of p l a i n m a t e r i a l and design. But some t a i l o r s made only expensive and d e c o r a t i v e a p p a r e l , w h i l e others made c l o t h i n g e x c l u s i v e l y f o r workers and t h e i r f a m i l i e s . S t i l l others s p e c i a l i z e d i n only women's or c h i l d r e n ' s c l o t h i n g . The same was true of shoemakers, glovers and h a t t e r s . Many of these a r t i s a n s i m i t a t e d E n g l i s h s t y l e s , designs and c o n s t r u c t i o n methods, o f t e n u n s u c c e s s f u l l y , l e a v i n g many fashi o n a b l e customers to import completed goods. Many t a i l o r s , f o r example, made a good l i v e l i h o o d from doing nothing more than importing fancy m a t e r i a l s and a c c e s s o r i e s . 3 ^ Massachusetts d i d not produce the expensive and r e f i n e d f i b e r s and f a b r i c s found i n Europe, and when these f a b r i c s were demanded by 207 Boston's merchants and s o c i a l e l i t e s , they were imported along w i t h the l a t e s t f a s h i o n designs. While the more a f f l u e n t of Boston's s o c i e t y had access to brocades, r i b b o n s , s i l k s , f i n e r c o t t o n s , l i n e n s and woolens, smooth f e l t s and s t y l i s h buttons and c l a s p s , the m a j o r i t y of the l e s s prosperous i n h a b i t a n t s c l o t h e d themselves i n coarse worsteds, l i n e n s , f e l t s , kerseys and l e a t h e r coats and breeches. The seventeenth century sumptuary laws, included i n the general r e g u l a t i o n s p e r t a i n i n g to s o c i a l rank and p o s i t i o n and o r d e r l y c o n t r o l , survived i n t o l a t e eighteenth century Boston not simply as an economic d i s t i n c t i o n but 39 a l s o as a mechanism f o r c r a f t s s p e c i a l i z a t i o n . So f a r , two d i s t i n c t , but interdependent, s e c t o r s of the Boston labor economy have been d e l i n e a t e d : the m e r c a n t i l e and manufacturing e n t e r p r i s e s that looked beyond Boston f o r economic sustenance and which generated c a p i t a l and incomes which c i r c u l a t e d through the town v i a the second sector — the l o c a l or domestic economies, most of which were r e t a i l i n nature. In both cases, the a r t i s a n s i n v o l v e d were s p e c i a l i z e d on two l e v e l s . In the f i r s t p l a c e , c e r t a i n trades were r e q u i r e d i n one sector of a c t i v i t y and not i n the other; and second, w i t h i n v a r i o u s trades there were s u b d i v i s i o n s of s p e c i a l i z a t i o n . In a l l cases, workers exchanged t h e i r labor and produced goods f o r wages, fees o r . p r i c e s . But those same workers, when co n t r a c t e d , sub-contracted or h i r e d to perform a task or produce an a r t i c l e , were r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e i r own t o o l s and work places and f o r a c q u i r i n g t h e i r own raw m a t e r i a l s . whether the end r e s u l t of a worker's e f f o r t was a \" p a r t \" 208 of a ship or a segment i n a l e a t h e r and l e a t h e r goods manufacturing process, or whether, l i k e shoemakers, t a i l o r s and cabinetmakers, he produced a complete and f i n i s h e d item, the a r t i s a n r e t a i n e d the f u l l use 40 and d i s p o s a l of h i s s k i l l e d l a b o r . S p e c i a l i z a t i o n d i d not erode the customary meaning of the con-temporary term \"craftsman.\" For example, the t h i r t y or so v a r i o u s c r a f t s r e q u i r e d to manufacture a completed sea-ready cargo s h i p , were not simply t h i r t y stages of a manufacturing process. The t h i r t y a r t i s a n s i n question were a l s o r e f i n i n g s p e c i a l q u a l i t i e s drawn from t h e i r wider c r a f t s backgrounds and applying them se p a r a t e l y and 41 i n d i v i d u a l l y toward a coherent whole product. These man could and d i d u t i l i z e other aspects of t h e i r c r a f t s s k i l l s away from s h i p b u i l d i n g when op p o r t u n i t y , choice or n e c e s s i t y d i c t a t e d . Therefore, a c e r t a i n minor f l e x i b i l i t y d i d occur among Boston's a r t i s a n s . But i t was more a v a r i a t i o n of work l o c a t i o n , employer or trades s u b - s p e c i a l t y than one of o u t r i g h t v o c a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y and v e r s a t i l i t y such as that p r a c t i c e d 42 i n the r u r a l towns. Apart from s h i p b u i l d i n g , there- was no s i n g l e l a b o r - i n t e n s i v e i n d u s t r i a l e n t e r p r i s e i n p r o v i n c i a l Boston and no set or permanent d i v i s i o n of l a b o r w i t h i n any s i n g l e work shop or manufac-t o r y . Indeed, the great m a j o r i t y of work shops were single-man opera-t i o n s . S p e c i a l i z a t i o n of s k i l l s and the f u l l - t i m e occupation of those s k i l l s d i d not e n t a i l long-term employment i n one l o c a t i o n or f o r one master craftsman or entrepreneur. Nor d i d i t mean that the i n d i v i d u a l a r t i s a n surrendered h i s independent n e g o t i a t i n g r i g h t s or h i s primary 43 f u n c t i o n i n e i t h e r labor t r a n s a c t i o n s or work o r g a n i z a t i o n . 209 For most of the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , Boston was home to a l a r g e body of ships carpenters. S h i p b u i l d i n g was a l a b o r - i n t e n s i v e i n d u s t r y . But i n d i v i d u a l c o n t r a c t o r s b u i l t one ship at a time and d e a l t w i t h independent c o n t r a c t i n g a r t i s a n s s i n g l y or i n small groups and only i n terms of the work re q u i r e d on a s i n g l e , s p e c i f i e d v e s s e l . A r t i s a n s moved from one c o n t r a c t o r to another as p a r t i c u l a r work was completed or c o n t r a c t s e x p i r e d . They turned t h e i r general trades s k i l l s to non-maritime work when s h i p b u i l d i n g d e c l i n e d or ceased or when there was a personal advantage i n working elsewhere. James R u s s e l l , f o r example, was a l t e r n a t i v e l y a \"housewright\" and a \" s h i p w r i g h t . \" H i s s p e c i a l t y was i n \" h u l l work,\" but he was a competent \"house b u i l d e r \" and \"wharf b u i l d e r . \" In the space of three years, between 1747 and 1750, 44 R u s s e l l worked on four major ships and \"framed\" at l e a s t f i v e \"houses.\" S i m i l a r l y , the shoemaker who d i d shop work f o r a master shoemaker s t i l l made a complete p a i r of shoes and r e t a i n e d and improved h i s s k i l l s . He was f r e e to n e g o t i a t e the p r i c e of h i s labor and product and could move l a t e r a l l y or upward-within h i s trade. He would have ample opp o r t u n i t y to produce independently, when the proper circumstances, h i s s k i l l and h i s ambition coalesced. Seldom was the a r t i s a n o b l i g e d to remain w i t h one employer or to l i m i t himself to one a c t i v i t y . By devoting himself more or l e s s f u l l time to h i s c r a f t , i n c o n t r a s t to the a r t i s a n i n the r u r a l town, and i n many cases e v o l v i n g a s p e c i a l t y from h i s c r a f t , the Boston a r t i s a n f i t t e d h i s v o c a t i o n a l a t t r i b u t e s to the s p e c i a l l a b o r needs and p r a c t i c e s of the Boston economy i n a way that would enhance h i s economic o p p o r t u n i t i e s . By p e r f e c t i n g h i s s k i l l s and w i t h c a r e f u l a p p l i c a t i o n of h i s c r a f t and l a b o r , the Boston a r t i s a n 45 remained independent. I f the substance and surroundings of h i s v o c a t i o n a l world were markedly d i f f e r e n t from those of the r u r a l a r t i s a n , he was no l e s s a f r e e man. Nor was h i s measure of s e c u r i t y and economic s t a b i l i t y l e s s a t t a i n a b l e than t h a t of h i s r u r a l counterpart. But the p r a c t i c a l ends of h i s work were represented by d i s t i n c t l y d i f f e r i n g m a t e r i a l f a c t o r s , and were achieved i n the pr o s e c u t i o n of h i s trade to i t s l o g i c a l upward l i m i t . Entrepreneurship, meaning the c o n t r o l , management and manipulation of l a b o r , product and p r o f i t beyond a pur e l y personal l e v e l , was the c o n d i t i o n to which the Boston a r t i s a n a s p i r e d i f he sought to e s t a b l i s h h i s p o s i t i o n i n the community and secure a s t a b l e economic f u t u r e f o r h i m s e l f , h i s f a m i l y and h i s successors. 211 NOTES CHAPTER VI xEdward Johnson, Wonder Working Providences of Scions Saviour i n New England (1655), ( e d i t i o n , New York: 1910), Book 3, p. 209. 2 Appendix I I I , i , i i ; Boston Assessment Census of 1742, i n BCR, V o l . 15, p. 369; MHS Misc. Bd. MSS, \"Va l u a t i o n s of Counties, 1751\"; MHS MSS, \" P r i c e ' s Map of Boston\" 1739, 1769; Shattuck, Census. The Boston censuses of 1742, 1752 and 1765 c i t e d by Shattuck are broken i n t o wards and give numbers of d w e l l i n g s . See a l s o M. Arch. MSS, V o l s . 130-134, \"Valuations of Towns,\" e s p e c i a l l y V o l . 130, pp. 92-147. 3 R.B. M o r r i s , Government and Labor i n E a r l y America (New York: 1946), pp. 35-71; Mary Roys Baker, \"Anglo-Massachusetts Trade Union Roots, 1630-1790,\" Labor H i s t o r y 14 (1973), pp. 352-96; E.G. N e l l i s , \"Labor and Community i n Mass. Bay: 1630-1660,\" Labor H i s t o r y 18 (1977), pp. 525-44. L I b i d . ; Mass. Bay Recs., V o l . I , 74, 92, 326, 340; Jacob F e l t , An H i s t o r i c a l Account of Mass. Currency (Boston: 1839), Wage and P r i c e Appendices. 5Mass. Bay Recs., V o l . I , 92, 340; V.S. C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufacture i n the United S t a t e s , 1607-1860 (Washington: 1916), pp. 31-73; W.B. Weedon, Economic and S o c i a l H i s t o r y of New England, 1620- 1789 (New York: 1890), V o l . I ; M o r r i s , Government and Labor, Chapters 1-2; Baker, \"Anglo-Massachusetts Trade Union Roots.\" D a r r e t t B. Rutman, Winthrop's Boston, 1630-1649 (Chapel H i l l : 1965); Johnson, Wonder Working Providence. 7G.B. Warden, Boston, 1689-1776 (Boston: 1970), pp. 102-25; Johnson, Wonder Working Providences; Appendix I I I ; Shattuck, Census, contains an extensive resume of c o l o n i a l p o p u l a t i o n and demographic i n f o r m a t i o n f o r Boston. Weedon, Economic and S o c i a l H i s t o r y , V o l . 1; A.H. Cole, The American Wool Manufacture (New York: 1926), V o l . 1, p. 49, note. 212 9BCR, V o l . 14, pp. 238-40, 280-82; Warden, Boston, pp. 15-34. 1 0 B a k e r MSS, \"V.S. C l a r k Notes,\" Box 2; M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 7; L o t t e and Bernard B a i l y n , Massachusetts Shipping, 1697-1714 (Cambridge: 1959). There were another 10,000 tons of f i s h i n g v e s s e l s i n the pro v i n c e , M. Arch., V o l . 130. l x S h a t t u c k , Census, pp. 2-6; M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 130, \"Val u a t i o n s of Towns,\" \"Boston.\" BCR, V o l . 15, p. 369. \"Adult male workers\" and \" p o l l s \" are the same t h i n g . 1 2BCR, V o l s . 7, 8, 11-17, 19-20, \"Minutes of Town Meeting\" and \"Selectmen's Minutes,\" 1660-1768, indexes, e s p e c i a l l y under \" S h i p b u i l d -i n g , \" \" S t i l l Houses,\" \"Slaughter Houses,\" \"Tan Yards,\" \"Houses,\" \"Wharves,\" e t c . M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 94, \"Muster R o l l s , \" pp. 302, 324, 328, 333, 347, 401. Warden, Boston, pp. 15-34. 1 3BCR, V o l . 14, pp. 238-40; M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 7; V o l . 117, \"Towns\" (\"Hallowell's Report\"), pp. 60-68. 1 4 B a k e r MSS, \"V.S. C l a r k Notes\"; M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 7, \"Commer-c i a l \" . ; MHS Misc. Bd. MSS, 1694-5, 1695; February 11-17, 1759, \"Wentworth L e t t e r s . \" Wentworth, a sh i p w r i g h t , g i v e s e x c e l l e n t d e t a i l s on trades f u n c t i o n s , numbers of workers, costs per ton, wages, and c o n t r a c t pro-cedures. A l s o , see MHS MSS, \"Robert Treat Paine Papers\"' for; 1754 and 1757. 1 5MHS Misc. Bd. MSS, 1759, \"Wentworth L e t t e r s \" ; M. Arch., V o l . 40, pp. 16-30; V o l . 43, pp. 130-136; V o l . 244, \"Accounts,\" pp. 57-85. 1 6M. Arch. MSS, V o l s . 60-66, \"Maritime\"; V o l s . 244-254, \"Accounts.\" See e s p e c i a l l y \"Ropemakers,\" \"Blockmakers,\" \"Ship Carpenters,\" \"Sawyers,\" \"Sailmakers,\" \"Coopers.\" BCR, V o l s . 11-17 under \"Shops\" and \"Workshops,\" and \"Trades.\" 1 7BCR, V o l . 14, p. 221; MHS Misc. Bd. MSS, \" P e t i t i o n , \" \"ri.d. 1755; Boston Town Papers, V o l . 7, pp. 1-2. 18 I b i d . The p u b l i c market, at which must beef and hide were s o l d i n the l a t e p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , a nnually handled some 1,200 c a t t l e and over 500 raw hides . 1 9BCR, V o l . 14, pp. 220-222; MHS MSS, \"Joseph Belknap Ledger 1748-1785,\" pp. 45-75. 213 20 C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufactures, pp. 99, 142, 167, 201, 209, 212. M. Arch., V o l . 40, pp. 256, 609; V o l . 44, pp. 329-30; V o l . 117, p. 60; V o l . 244, document 486, f o l i o 321; V o l . 43, pp. 59-67. 21 W.H. Whitmore, compiler, C o l o n i a l Laws . . . (Boston: 1889), pp. 88-90; \"Joseph Belknap Ledger\"; M. Arch., V o l . 117, p. 60 gives estimates on numbers of men i n v o l v e d i n l e a t h e r work and some f i g u r e s on production of shoes, gloves, e t c . 2 ? BCR, V o l . 14, pp. 238-40; M. Arch., V o l . 117, pp. 60-68. 23 MHS. Misc. Bd. MSS contains many references to d i s t i l l i n g economics...and s t i l l o p e r a tion. Most of the m a t e r i a l i n these volumes i s o f f a p e r s o n a l , p r i v a t e type and r e v e a l s the high degree of pro-f e s s i o n a l competence and p r i d e of these s k i l l e d business a r t i s a n s . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , these manuscripts are i n unnumbered volumes, organized only by chronology, and are not indexed. The best s i n g l e manuscript source f o r the b u i l d i n g , s t o c k i n g and o p e r a t i o n of an eighteenth century Boston d i s t i l l e r y i s i n MHS, MSS \"Robert Treat Paine Papers\" (1754) . These accounts show the enormous b u i l d i n g and m a t e r i a l stock expense (about 3 to 4 times the annual income of a tradesman. There i s some reference to the p r o f i t - s h a r i n g system used between Paine, the owner, and h i s contracted s t i l l o perators. 24 C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufactures, pp. 31-122; M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 59, \"Manufactures\"; V o l . 70, p. 567; V o l . 41, p. 35; V o l . 44, p. 74; V o l . 117, pp. 61, 66. 2 5BCR, V o l s . 7-8, 11-17, 19-20. Indexed under \"Coopers\" and \"Cooperage.\" On r e g u l a t i o n see C o l o n i a l Laws, pp. 16-17. 26 On growth, p e r i o d i c f l u c t u a t i o n and temporary d e c l i n e , and on the s t a b i l i z a t i o n of the Boston economy a f t e r 1740, see Warden, Boston, and v a r i o u s r e p o r t s and p e t i t i o n s i n BCR, Vol.••14 and i n M. Arch,, V o l . 117 under \"Boston.\" On worker s p e c i a l i z a t i o n , see M. Arch. \"Trades\" catalogue. A sample of 200 a r t i s a n s who were l i s t e d i n Probate and Deeds records under broad c r a f t s c a t e g o r i e s was taken from MHS \"Thwing Catalogue\" and compared to s p e c i a l i z e d work done by the same men l i s t e d i n the g e n e a l o g i c a l indexes at M. Arch, and BCR. 27 On s a i l o r s see Baker MSS, \"V.S. C l a r k Notes.\" On c a r t e r s , M. Arch., V o l . 59. The v a r i o u s l i n k a g e s i n the Boston commercial economy are discussed i n C a r l Bridenbaugh, C i t i e s i n the Wilderness . . . (New York: 1938) and C i t i e s i n Revolt . . . (New York: 1955) and Warden, Boston, pp. 15-126. 28 M. Arch., V o l . 94, \"Muster R o l l s \" i n d i c a t e s a 2-1 r a t i o i n favor of workers i n v o l v e d i n \" l o c a l \" economies over those i n \"export\" r e l a t e d occupations. 214 On bakers see BCR, V o l s . 7-8, 11-17, 19-20 under \"Bakers,\" \"Baking,\" \"Bread,\" \"Grain\"; M. Arch. Index f i l e on \"Bakers\"; on the Boston P u b l i c Granary see Boston Town Papers, V o l . 4, pp. 229-30 e s p e c i a l l y . Baking, judging from the e x t r a o r d i n a r y amount of p u b l i c a t t e n t i o n i t r e c e i v e d , was the most c l o s e l y regulated trade and r e t a i l a c t i v i t y i n p r o v i n c i a l Boston. See W.H. Whitmore, compiler, C o l o n i a l Laws . . . (Boston: 1889), p. 8; Mass. Bay Recs., V o l s . 1-5, passim; Acts and Resolves, V o l s . 1-5, passim. 30 M. Arch., V o l . 59, \"Manufactures.\" 31 See above, note 2; and Warden, Boston, Chapters 2 and 7. See e s p e c i a l l y Appendix I I I . Ward populations are found i n the Shattuck references i n note 2 i n t h i s present chapter. For m i l l s i n Boston, and i n most r u r a l towns, see M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 130, e s p e c i a l l y pp. 92-147. 32 On the v a r y i n g and v a r i o u s uses of cash, p r i v a t e and p u b l i c b i l l s of c r e d i t , see F e l t , H i s t o r y of Mass. Currency; Baker MSS, \"V.S. C l a r k Notes\"; A.H. Cole, American Wool Manufacture estimates that n e a r l y a l l f i n a n c i a l t r a n s a c t i o n s which involved workers were conducted using \"wages\" and not b a r t e r or l a b o r c r e d i t . 33 ' W.R. B a g n a l l , The T e x t i l e I n d u s t r i e s of the United States (Cambridge, Mass.: 1898), Chapters 1-2. 34 \"Joseph Belknap Ledgers\" and \"Robert Treat Paine Papers\" l i s t hundreds of examples of labor c o n t r a c t s and agreements. See e s p e c i a l l y the f o l l o w i n g a r t i s a n accounts at Baker MSS, \" H o p e s t i l l Foster Ledger\" (wood products); \"Joseph P i c o Daybook\" (cooper, packer, warehousing); \"John Parker Accounts\" ( p o t t e r ) ; \"Jacob Nash Accounts\" ( d i s t i l l e r ) ; \"Edward Marrett Accounts ( t a i l o r ) ; \"James R u s s e l l Receipt Book\" (carpenter, house c o n t r a c t o r ) . 35 W.M. W h i t e h i l l , Boston: A Topographical H i s t o r y (2nd ed. Cambridge: 1968); J u s t i n Winsor, e d i t o r , The Memorial H i s t o r y of Boston, I n c l u d i n g S u f f o l k County (Boston: 1881), V o l s . 1-2; Annie Thwing, The Crooked and Narrow S t r e e t s of Boston (Boston: 1920); Anon. Some Considerations Against the S e t t i n g up of a Market (Boston: 1733) (copy at MHS). I b i d . , and M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 59, \"Manufactures.\" The l a t t e r reference shows the wide use of the term \"huckster\" i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts. 3 7\"V.S. C l a r k Notes,\" Box 6; M. Arch. MSS., V o l . 59, \"Manu-f a c t u r e s \" ; the amount of \"set work\" i n r e l a t i o n to \"bespoke\" work among v a r i o u s Boston trades i s f u r t h e r discussed i n BCR, V o l . 14, pp. 238-40, \" P e t i t i o n to the General Court.\" 215 O Q Baker MSS, \"V.S. C l a r k Notes,\" Boxes 1.& 2; MSS 4 5 1 r 2 8 1 , \"Daniel Rea Daybooks and Ledgers, 1736-84,\" 3 V o l s , ( t a i l o r ) ; MSS 451M358, \"Edward Marrett Daybooks and I n v o i c e s , 1750-80\"; Houghton MSS, \"Marrett D i a r i e s . \" 39 I b i d . , and C o l o n i a l Laws, pp. 5-6. 4 0\"V.S. C l a r k Notes,\" Box 1. 4 1MHS Misc. Bd. MSS, \"Wentworth L e t t e r \" (1759). Boston Town Papers, V o l . 2, pp. 2-11; MHS, \"Thwing Catalogue,\" and sample survey of trades c r e d e n t i a l s and work s p e c i a l t i e s c i t e d here i n note 26. \"Joseph Belknap Ledgers.\" Belknap, a leather-works entre-preneur, operated a l a r g e o p e r a t i o n of both primary l e a t h e r treatment and l e a t h e r goods manufacture. He r e g u l a r l y renegotiated c o n t r a c t terms w i t h a f l u i d number of a r t i s a n s who used h i s f a c i l i t i e s and shared h i s o r g a n i z a t i o n and market. 4 4 B a k e r MSS, \"James R u s s e l l Receipt Books; 1747-1754\"; f o r examples, see M. Arch., V o l . 44, pp. 16-30; V o l . 43, pp. 130-136. 4 5\"V.S. C l a r k Notes,\" Boxes 1 and 2. CHAPTER V I I THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ARTISAN The e x p l o i t a t i o n of h i s s p e c i a l s k i l l s and v o c a t i o n a l indepen-dence was the Boston a r t i s a n ' s conventional method of g a i n i n g s o c i a l and economic advancement. By developing a work s p e c i a l t y , he sought to f u r t h e r the demand f o r h i s s e r v i c e s i n the s e l e c t i v e Boston econ-omy; by e x e r c i s i n g f u l l contact w i t h a l l f a c e t s of h i s c r a f t and r e -t a i n i n g a l e g i t i m a t e freedom to dispose of h i s time and l a b o r , the a r t i s a n attempted to expand h i s income and advance h i s s t a t u s . While i t was true that a l l s k i l l e d workers i n Boston operated as f r e e i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h i n the economy and were self-employed to the extent that they contracted s p e c i f i c terms of employment, s e r v i c e or prod-u c t i o n , there was nevertheless a h i e r a r c h y of c o n t r a c t o r s , sub-con-t r a c t o r s , and employed craftsmen among the a r t i s a n p o p u l a t i o n of B o ston. 1 There was no contemporary use of the word \"entrepreneur\" to d e s c r i b e a business f u n c t i o n i n the use of l a b o r and product. But the terms \"housewright\" and \"master b u i l d e r , \" \"house carpenter\" and \"carpenter\" denoted d i s t i n c t i o n s of s t a t u s and a u t h o r i t y between s e v e r a l a r t i s a n s of the same trade i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n i n d u s t r y . In s h i p b u i l d i n g , the word \" s h i p \" replaced \"house\" to d e f i n e a s i m i l a r o r g a n i z a t i o n of r e l a t i v e s u p e r i o r i t y . To t r a n s l a t e the p r a c t i c a l 216 meanings of these work d e s i g n a t i o n s : the \"housewright\" was one who \" b u i l t houses,\" the \"house carpenter\" was one who \"worked on houses\" and the \"carpenter\" was one, u s u a l l y , who d i d p r e l i m i n a r y carpentry 2 of a general nature. U n l i k e the format p r e v a i l i n g i n the r u r a l s e t -t i n g , where the simple term \"carpenters\" was used almost e x c l u s i v e l y , and where c o n t r a c t o r s and sub-contractors r e g u l a r l y changed p o s i t i o n s from time to time when more p r e s s i n g domestic or a g r i c u l t u r a l i s s u e s arose, the system f o r the c o n s t r u c t i o n of b u i l d i n g s i n Boston was conducted on a p r i n c i p l e of f i x e d business and labor s p e c i a l t i e s . In Boston, i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a house, the customer u s u a l l y contracted the e n t i r e p r o j e c t , i n c l u d i n g such things as drainage systems and sidewalks, to a s i n g l e man. The c o n t r a c t o r i n t h i s case would be a housewright, a master craftsman who, over time, had acquired the s k i l l , experience, r e p u t a t i o n , c a p i t a l or c r e d i t to undertake such p r o j e c t s and had elevated himself from independent a r t i s a n to entrepreneur. This man possessed the means and e x p e r t i s e to estimate a p r o f i t a b l e c o s t , employ workers, organize the design and acquire m a t e r i a l s and supervise c o n s t r u c t i o n . One of Boston's most s u c c e s s f u l \"master b u i l d e r s \" of the l a t e p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d was Thomas Gunter. He \" b u i l t \" the \"Manufactory House\" near Boston Common i n 1753 under c o n t r a c t to the General Court and a consortium of l o c a l merchants. These businessmen shared t h e i r m e r c a n t i l e contacts w i t h Gunter and ensured him a s u f f i c i e n t and r e g u l a r supply of m a t e r i a l s f o r the l a r g e p r o j e c t . Gunter, who had progressed from a sub-contrac-t i n g general carpenter i n the 1730s, to a b u i l d i n g entrepreneur, had, 218 by the 1750s, acquired a good c a p i t a l base of h i s own and e x c e l l e n t 3 c r e d i t and m a t e r i a l supply connections. When terms had been set between the housewright and the c l i e n t — o f t e n part funds were advanced f o r m a t e r i a l and l a b o r — the contrac-t o r engaged from one to three \"house carpenters,\" depending on the s i z e , design and purpose of the s t r u c t u r e and the amount of time a l -l o t t e d f o r i t s completion. These house carpenters were l e f t to arrange f o r the supply of t h e i r own necessary m a t e r i a l s and l a b o r . They con-t r a c t e d w i t h s u p p l i e r s f o r the lumber, n a i l s , and f i x t u r e s f o r which they were r e s p o n s i b l e . Then they employed s k i l l e d and u n s k i l l e d help. The former were u s u a l l y journeymen carpenters or masons who would be accompanied by apprentices. Wages were determined or negotiated between the house carpenter and other carpenters or masons and t h e i r h e l p e r s , and charged d i r e c t l y to the housewright-contractor. Through-out, the housewright was wholly i n charge of arranging and d i r e c t i n g 4 the many and v a r i o u s tradesmen who took part i n the p r o j e c t . P r i n -c i p a l among the other s p e c i a l i s t s were chimney and foundation masons, j o i n e r s , s h i n g l e r s , g l a z i e r s , and b r a z i e r s and blacksmiths f o r brass f i x t u r e s and f i r e p l a c e metalwork. In each case, the i n d i v i d u a l a r t i -san was r e s p o n s i b l e f o r his- own s k i l l e d or u n s k i l l e d l a b o r a s s i s t a n c e and f o r any m a t e r i a l s which had not already been provided by the house-wright. There was some necessary d i v e r s i t y and f l e x i b i l i t y of organ-i z a t i o n and work on these p r o j e c t s . D a i l y wages or s p e c i f i e d p i e c e -work s e c t i o n s of the p r o j e c t were sometimes paid d i r e c t l y by the customer to the i n d i v i d u a l a r t i s a n , although the housewright normally d i d t h i s and included adjustments f o r m a t e r i a l s and e x t r a l a b o r . Among the workers, the mason was e s p e c i a l l y v e r s a t i l e and o f t e n a s i n g l e mason l a i d the foundations, b u i l t the f i r e p l a c e , chimneys and property-l i n e w a l l s and p l a s t e r e d and painted the i n t e r i o r s . The common carpenter o f t e n d i d the s h i n g l i n g and rough beamwork, clapboarding and f l o o r i n g . Many of the l a b o r e r s i n house b u i l d i n g had c o n s i d e r a b l e experience and were given some s p e c i a l i z e d tasks such as measuring and c u t t i n g , to complement t h e i r otherwise wholly manuall f u n c t i o n s . The f i n i s h e d i n t e r i o r work and s p e c i a l t y a d d i t i o n s and adornments a l s o were sub-contracted by the housewright. G l a z i e r s were co n t r a c t e d , r a t h e r than \"employed,\" to custom c u t , f i t and i n s t a l l windows and charged f o r both time and m a t e r i a l s . Carpenters or j o i n e r s hung doors and f i n i s h e d w a l l p a n e l l i n g and f l o o r s and the j o i n e r s d i d a l l the s p e c i a l t y c a r v i n g and other i n t e r i o r f i n i s h e d wood work. Blacksmiths and b r a z i e r s were h i r e d on s i m i l a r terms to make, shape and apply the v a r i o u s rough and fancy metal f i t t i n g s . The s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h i s system of sub-contracting was that i t a f f o r d e d the i n d i v i d u a l worker a l a r g e measure of independence i n h i s n e g o t i a t i n g of l a b o r and m a t e r i a l c o s t s . Furthermore, i t i n s t i l l e d i n b u i l d i n g a r t i s a n s a knowledge of o r g a n i z a t i o n of l a b o r , time and m a t e r i a l procurement; that experience was most most useful*, as John Cotman observed, \"to understand the business of c o n t r a c t s \" i f the journeyman was l a t e r to be a master builder.\"' 220 Of course there were v a r i a t i o n s on t h i s scheme. Sometimes the housewright himself d i d most or a l l of the rough s t r u c t u r a l work, but h i s f u n c t i o n was normally one of organizer and supervisor of the p r o j e c t . The arrangements f o r m a t e r i a l s were f l e x i b l e . ' too. There was a l a r g e and r e g u l a r market f o r b u i l d i n g s u p p l i e s i n Boston. The annual c o n s t r u c t i o n of an average of between 2,000 and 4,000 tons of shipping and roughly 100 houses, shops or wharf a d d i t i o n s had e s t a -b l i s h e d a supply i n d u s t r y that l i n k e d some nearby r u r a l sawmills w i t h Boston lumber and b u i l d i n g m a t e r i a l wholesalers. O c c a s i o n a l l y the c l i e n t provided a l l or a p o r t i o n of the r e q u i r e d m a t e r i a l s and the r e s u l t i n g form of sub-contracting was a l t e r e d from normal p r a c t i c e , sometimes c r e a t i n g complications and confusion among the v a r i o u s en-l i s t e d a r t i s a n s . In some cases, the housewright's c o n t r o l of c a p i t a l and h i s business connections were extensive enough f o r him to c o n t r o l the cost and supply of b u i l d i n g m a t e r i a l s and sub-contrac-t o r s w e r e . l e f t to work f o r d a i l y wages or lump sums. O c c a s i o n a l l y , sub-contracting a r t i s a n s chose to have the c o n t r a c t o r arrange a l l mat-e r i a l supply and labor h e l p , d e c i d i n g that a d a i l y wage or mutually agreed gross charge was more convenient to them. But i d e a l l y , and u s u a l l y , b u i l d i n g s i n Boston were erected as the o u t l i n e i n d i c a t e s : by the engagement, by a c l i e n t , of a master-builder who then regulated the process. The important r a m i f i c a t i o n of t h i s system was the em-phasis on sub-contracting r a t h e r than d i r e c t wage and term employment. While v a r i o u s subordinate a r t i s a n s were under the d i r e c t i o n of a s e n i o r , i n f l u e n t i a l and managerial a r t i s a n - e n t r e p r e n e u r , t h i s system s t i l l a f f o r d e d those tradesmen a l a r g e measure of independence and f l e x i b i l i t y . As i n d i v i d u a l sub-contractors, these a r t i s a n s c o u l d , by hard work and j u d i c i o u s use of l a b o r and m a t e r i a l s , have some cont-r o l over the f i n a n c i a l b e n e f i t s to themselves; so that even w i t h i n the h e i r a r c h y of trades business d i v i s i o n s , the u s e f u l and independent a p p l i c a t i o n of a s p e c i a l i z e d s k i l l could ensure f r e e and p r o f i t a b l e i n d i v i d u a l use of l a b o r . A s i m i l a r method of c o n t r a c t i n g and deploy-ment of labo r was followed i n s h i p b u i l d i n g , and there, as i n b u i l d i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n , many of the c o n t r a c t o r s were former sub-contracting or even wage a r t i s a n s who had r i s e n to a p o s i t i o n of prominence i n t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e c r a f t s . As Benjamin H a l l o w e l l reported i n 1756, sub-con-t r a c t i n g was very widespread i n the s h i p b u i l d i n g i n d u s t r y and he per-ceived the economic and s o c i a l b e n e f i t s of t h i s p r a c t i c e to be i n the wider d i s t r i b u t i o n of c a p i t a l and the encouragement of a \" s p i r i t \" of i n d i v i d u a l e n t e r p r i s e i n i n c i p i e n t c o n t r a c t o r s . He f e l t t hat sub-' c o n t r a c t i n g — more than \"wages\" — helped balance and i n c r e a s e the tax assessment f o r the town. 7 House b u i l d i n g serves as an a p p r o p r i a t e example of the i n t e r n a l o r d e r i n g of trades p r a c t i c e s . Carpentry was the s i n g l e most necessary and popular c r a f t i n p r o v i n c i a l Boston and perhaps 10% of the town's a r t i s a n s followed that trade (Table V I ) . And the reason f o r i t s p o p u l a r i t y was simple: p o p u l a t i o n growth and c o n c e n t r a t i o n , and the enormous preponderance of wood over b r i c k or stone i n r e s i d e n t i a l and i n d u s t r i a l — s h o p c o n s t r u c t i o n . Nearly three-quarters of Boston's g b u i l d i n g s and a l l of i t s wharfage was made of wood. The c o n s t r u c t i o n 222 i n d u s t r y was an a t t r a c t i v e means f o r the c i r c u l a t i o n of c a p i t a l and c r e d i t c o l l a t e r a l . For employment, c o n s t r u c t i o n was as v i t a l to the town's a r t i s a n s as were the m e r c a n t i l e , manufacturing and l o c a l 9 economies. Thus i t was an important sub-economy and was r e l i a b l y constant except i n times of acute f i n a n c i a l or p o p u l a t i o n retrenchment. But over the l e n g t h of the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , an average of over 100 houses a year, i n c l u d i n g replacements, were b u i l t : i n the town. In ex t r a o r d i n a r y p e r i o d s , such as that which followed the f i r e of 1711, when 400 b u i l d i n g s were destroyed and had to be re p l a c e d , and when the town's p o p u l a t i o n was growing r a p i d l y , house c o n s t r u c t i o n i n Boston probably employed more workers than any other l o c a l c o l l e c t i v e e n t e r p r i s e . I t was during periods of r a p i d growth, as w e l l as i n the p e r e n n i a l replacement and r e p a i r market, that the i n t e l l i g e n t , ambitious and r e s o u r c e f u l carpenters advanced t h e i r economic s t a t u s . The numbers of carpenters who rose to \"master b u i l d e r s \" was impressive. A sample of f i f t y \" carpenters\" of the 1720-30 decade i n Boston, revealed that at l e a s t twenty were \" b u i l d e r s \" or \"con-t r a c t o r s \" by the 1740s and 1750s. Some examples, to be found i n the rec o r d s , are the aforementioned Thomas Gunter, along w i t h Thomas A t k i n s , John Clough, Benjamin and W i l l i a m Eustus, Thomas Jones, Joshua Thornton, Robert P i e r p o n t , James Ridgeway and T i l e s t o n e Onesipharus. What d i s t i n g u i s h e s these names f u r t h e r i s that these men, or t h e i r sons were l a t e r to be found l i s t e d as \"merchants.\" The upward l i m i t s of sta t u s f o r ambitious carpenters d i d not terminate w i t h \"master b u i l d e r . M ± ^ Entrepreneurship was a means by which a l l Boston a r t i s a n s , of a l l 223 c a l l i n g s , could seek to c o n s o l i d a t e and improve the s o c i a l and econ-omic p o s i t i o n s i n the community f o r themselves, t h e i r f a m i l i e s and h e i r s . Entrepreneurship was the upper s t a t u s l e v e l f o r s u c c e s s f u l , p r a c t i c i n g a r t i s a n s and was gained by time, energy, d i l i g e n c e , c r a f t s s k i l l , f r u g a l i t y , s o b r i e t y , l u c k and opportunism. C e r t a i n l y the prospects were leavened by current economic c o n d i t i o n s and r e l a t i v e demand. By comparison, the f a r m e r - a r t i s a n a l s o considered the ends of working i n r u r a l Massachusetts to be solvency, r e s i d e n t i a l perma-nence and labor s t a b i l i t y ; but h i s p r o s e c u t i o n of c r a f t s acumen and c o n t r a c t s was accompanied or followed by the possession of a g r i -c u l t u r a l landed e s t a t e . In Boston the a r t i s a n a s p i r e d to the same s o c i a l and m a t e r i a l g o a l s , but he pursued h i s aims by advancing h i s c r a f t and work from a p o r t a b l e s p e c i a l t y to a business or entrepren-e u r i a l end; and h i s v e r s i o n of r e a l e s t a t e was measured i n b u i l d i n g s and b u i l d i n g lots.\"'\"''\" In Boston, property meant houses, shops, ware-houses and wharves and land was measured i n f e e t and not acres. But i n Boston the value of s t r u c t u r e s was seven or more times that of r u r a l houses, barns and shops. B u i l d i n g s i n Boston produced revenue and had f i x e d v a l u e , j u s t as arable land had i n the r u r a l towns. In both cases property was a frequent and p r o f i t a b l e means of money or c r e d i t exchange and c o l l a t e r a l . Whether i n a r a b l e acreage or i n a Boston tenement, property was pursued as a mark of solvency and s o c i a l sec-u r i t y . For the Boston worker, entrepreneurship c o e x i s t e d w i t h the ownership of property, and became the means of augmenting h i s general v o c a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s . As G.B. Warden discovered i n h i s analyses of Boston property, about 40% of the value of annual property t r a n s a c t i o n s between 1690 and 1760 i n v o l v e d \"craftsmen.\" That 40% f i g u r e i s very 12 c l o s e to the number of a r t i s a n s i n the Boston p o p u l a t i o n . I f entrepreneurship can be s a i d to comprise investment and r i s k , and the o r g a n i z a t i o n , marketing, d i s t r i b u t i o n , p r i c i n g and gen-e r a l c o n t r o l of the y i e l d s from one's own and/or another's l a b o r , then most Boston a r t i s a n s p r a c t i c e d a rudimentary form of entrepreneurship, even as o r d i n a r y independent workers. The c l e a r e s t example of the i n d i v i d u a l a r t i s a n as entrepreneur l a y i n the r e t a i l c r a f t s . The independent baker, brewer-taverner, weaver, t a i l o r or shoemaker a l l p r a c t i c e d business management as part of t h e i r a r t i s a n s t a t u s by 13 d i r e c t l y r e t a i l i n g t h e i r own f i n i s h e d products. Even the c a r t e r , among the lowest of the t r a i n e d or apprenticed c r a f t s , was e s s e n t i a l l y a businessman who negotiated f r e e l y w i t h others f o r h i s time, l a b o r , s k i l l , connections and f a c i l i t i e s . The small s c a l e of the p r o v i n c i a l r e t a i l economy, even i n a concentrated market l i k e Boston, d i d not permit a f u l l s e p a r a t i o n of manufacturers from d i s t r i b u t o r s , and many s i n g l e craftsmen acted as producers, r e t a i l e r s and businessmen; that i s , they p e r s o n a l l y arranged stock and m a t e r i a l s , fashioned a product and r e t a i l e d i t , on t h e i r own and the i n d i v i d u a l customer's terms. Often coupled w i t h the a c t i v i t y of r e t a i l i n g were r a r e s k i l l s such as those of watchmakers, goldsmiths or p r i n t e r s . The b l a c k s m i t h , anywhere i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts, stands as a prime example of the self-employed a r t i s a n , owning h i s forge and shop, r e s p o n s i b l e f o r h i s own t o o l s and raw m a t e r i a l s , and d e a l i n g d i r e c t l y w i t h the market-14 r e t a i l end of h i s l a b o r e n t e r p r i s e . 225 However, there was a graduated s c a l e of entrepreneurship. I t ran the spectrum of endeavour from i n d i v i d u a l l y - r u n shops to l a r g e -s c a l e l a b o r c o n t r o l and e v e n t u a l l y was p r a c t i c e d through c a p i t a l i n -vestment and m e r c a n t i l e venture. The example of the housewright i s one case of labor management i n which the c o n t r a c t o r a c t u a l l y made a p r o f i t from the labor of others and had o v e r a l l , i f i n f o r m a l , c o n t r o l i n the c o l l e c t i v e produce of s e v e r a l independent a r t i s a n s . But i n d i v i d u a l businessmen who d i d e x e r c i s e extensive c o n t r o l , could not govern l a r g e l a b o r systems comprised of numerous dependent workers. The l a r g e s t leather-producing yard and work house i n p r o v i n c i a l Boston, owned by a former independent l e a t h e r d r e s s e r , Joseph Belknap, inv o l v e d only twenty men. Because of the laws p e r t a i n i n g to c r a f t s e x c l u s i v i t y , the v a r i o u s stages of the l e a t h e r manufacturing process were subdivided i n t o tanning, c u r i n g , d r e s s i n g and so on; and the a r t i s a n s w i t h i n those d i v i s i o n s r e t a i n e d both t h e i r s k i l l s and st a t u s and c o n t r o l over t h e i r r o l e s i n the process.\"^ Moreover, they were f r e e to s t r i k e out as independent shop owners and they f r e q u e n t l y d i d , when c a p i t a l was obtained and when c o n d i t i o n s were opportune. the owner of the operation d i d have r i g h t s of s a l e and marketing and th e r e f o r e d i d p r o f i t d i r e c t l y from the l a b o r s of ot h e r s , but he was s t i l l o b l i g e d to de a l w i t h h i s contracted workers i n terms of the value of t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e l a b o r s and t h e i r d i s p o s a b l e s k i l l s . Artisan-entrepreneurs f l o u r i s h e d i n shop c r a f t s such as shoemaking, weaving, t a i l o r i n g and coopering. Although the m a j o r i t y of these trades were conducted by i n d i v i d u a l s i n one-man shops, there was an elaborate sub-contracting network w i t h i n these i n d u s t r i e s . Often, a young journeyman, unable to purchase or arrange c r e d i t f o r stocks of raw m a t e r i a l s , inexperienced i n q u a n t i t y p r o d u c t i o n , unknown i n the community and u n c e r t a i n of market prospects, would sub-contract h i s l a b o r to an e s t a b l i s h e d a r t i s a n - r e t a i l e r . The l a t t e r , because of the nature of the p a r t i c u l a r commodity and w i t h c o n s i d e r a t i o n of market demand, would stock f i n i s h e d goods f o r volume s a l e to d i r e c t users or other r e t a i l or export merchants. This p r a c t i c e was espec-i a l l y common among coopers and weavers. The young journeyman would then contract to produce f i n i s h e d products f o r the master-journeyman's s t o c k s , u s u a l l y i n the l a t t e r ' s shop or work premises. But t h i s k i n d of o p e r a t i o n and arrangement was l i m i t e d by the u n c e r t a i n general mar-ket and by the i n e v i t a b l e d e p a r t u r e — f o r i n d i v i d u a l , personal production — by the sub-contracting a r t i s a n . Few, i f any, shoemaking shops i n Boston were occupied by more than f i v e journeymen at any time and s i m i l a r numbers appeared i n weaving, t a i l o r i n g , coopering, f u r n -iture-making and most other shop i n d u s t r i e s . Moreover, even when a m a s t e r - a r t i s a n d i d \"employ\" others to produce f o r him, the frequent turnover of workers made h i s own production goals u n a t t a i r i a b l e c or at l e a s t u n p r e d i c t a b l e over the long term. X^ 227 The combination of a l i m i t e d and v a r i a b l e market and the independent nature of Boston a r t i s a n s set c e r t a i n bounds on l a r g e shop i n d u s t r i e s . These l i m i t a t i o n s were compounded by the customary a t t i t u d e of p r o v i n c i a l a r t i s a n s , who had t r a d i t i o n a l l y maintained s o c i a l and economic independence through n e g o t i a b l e c r e d i t f o r investment i n shops, and by p r a c t i c i n g t h e i r \" a r t s \" completely and i n d i v i d u a l l y . Competition among i n d i v i d u a l s set l i m i t s to the s c a l e of c r a f t s entre-preneurism and prevented concentrations of i n d u s t r i a l c r a f t s under s i n g l e management. Shipwrights and housewrights o f t e n found themselves competing f o r general c o n t r a c t s w i t h carpenters who had p r e v i o u s l y \" 17 sub-contracted from themV Some trades, such as house-joinery, could not be organized as wage-labor businesses because of the p e c u l i a r nature of the p a r t i c u l a r c r a f t ; j o i n e r s were needed c o n s t a n t l y , of course, but o n l y f o r short periods of time, f o r a l a r g e number of s m a l l , b r i e f , s p e c i a l i z e d separate tasks and by a great v a r i e t y of customers. The l i m i t s to i n d u s t r i a l , r e t a i l or c o n s t r u c t i o n business expansion, meant that the mature and ambitious a r t i s a n - e n t r e p r e n e u r had to s e t t l e a t a f i x e d l e v e l of p r o s p e r i t y or i f he was b o l d enough, 18 r e d i r e c t h i s c a p i t a l i n t e r e s t s . In p r o v i n c i a l Boston, the surest way to o b t a i n wealth, and s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l standing and i n f l u e n c e , was to employ c a p i t a l . To reach beyond c r a f t s entrepreneurship to the s t a t u s of \"merchant\" and \"gentlemen\"' was to become i n v o l v e d i n commercial t r a d i n g and the o r g a n i z a t i o n and manipulation of c a p i t a l , c o l l a t e r a l and ready c r e d i t . C a p i t a l , i n the form of property, im-ported i n v e n t o r i e s of volume stock, e x t e r n a l t r a d e , shipping and i n -vestment, could ignore the boundaries of the Boston economy. Much new c a p i t a l came from B r i t i s h sources, o f t e n from i n v e s t o r s who c o l l a b o r a t e d w i t h Boston merchants i n the h i g h - y i e l d shipping commerce of the A t l a n t i c c o l o n i e s . Normally t h i s form of investment i n v o l v e d only modest r i s k V but some investment c a p i t a l was a v a i l a b l e to r i s k -t a k i n g entrepreneurs f o r use i n new shipping or d i f f e r e n t or l a r g e r cargoes, or even i n l o c a l m e r c a n t i l e a c t i v i t y . C a p i t a l and l o c a l and f o r e i g n c r e d i t flowed through and beyond the small s c a l e economies of the independent business a r t i s a n , the small shops and production ventures. There had been a merchant c l a s s i n Massachusetts from the founding of the Colony. By the middle of the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d i t numbered over 200 prominent l o c a l , p r o v i n c i a l , i m p e r i a l and i n t e r n a t i o n a l t r a d e r s , shippers and i n v e s t o r s . I t represented the top l e v e l of the s e v e r a l hundred w h o l e s a l e r s , r e t a i l e r s and business a r t i s a n s who con-sidered themselves \"merchants\" i n eighteenth century Boston. This upper l a y e r of wealth and i n f l u e n c e was v a r i e d and h i e r a r c h i c a l of course, but i t s members a l l shared a common a t t r i b u t e : they derived incomes from beyond the p r e c i n c t s of Boston. As a s o c i a l group i t was i n f l u e n t i a l and s u c c e s s f u l and as the seventeenth century evolved i t had c o n s o l i d a t e d i t s e l f i n t o a s e l f - p e r p e t u a t i n g stratum that governed the Massachusetts p o l i t y and economy. At i t s core was a c l u s t e r of f a m i l i e s whose sons and grandsons i n h e r i t e d merchant s t a t u s i n t o and beyond the eighteenth century. I t was by turns com-p e t i t i v e and cooperative. I t s membership expanded and receded w i t h the economy. New names r e g u l a r l y appeared i n i t s ranks as a few o l d e r names disappeared f o r one reason or another. T6' -its number were added merchants and i n v e s t o r s from o u t s i d e Boston who came to take , - - 20 part i n the town s maritime trade economy. Throughout, t h i s merchant c l a s s i ncluded and a t t r a c t e d the s u c c e s s f u l small merchants and entrepreneurs who had r i s e n i n wealth, s t a t u r e and i n f l u e n c e from the s t a t u s of a r t i s a n . Of course, only a t i n y m i n o r i t y of Boston's a r t i s a n s or t h e i r sons achieved the rank and d i s t i n c t i o n of \"gentleman\" or \"merchant, esquire,',' but enough of them a t t a i n e d merchant s t a t u s to demonstrate the u l t i m a t e success of the s k i l l e d worker i n t h i s s o c i e t y . These t i t l e s were extremely important i n eighteenth century Boston; \"gentleman\" u s u a l l y r e f e r r e d to a r e t i r e d man of s u b s t a n t i a l wealth and was r a r e . In f a c t there were only twenty-three so l i s t e d i n the 1790 census and twenty-one i n the 1765 Assessment R o l l . < l ;Merchant, esquire'.\" was an i n f o r m a l t i t l e given to the most s u c c e s s f u l of the merchant c l a s s , and of the 200 w e a l t h i e s t Boston merchants of 1754, fewer than f i f t y were known as \"Merchant, e s q u i r e . \" Both t i t l e s had p o l i t i c a l or j u d i c i a l conno-t a t i o n s . Of Boston's most prominant merchants i n the 1750s, some of the names r e v e a l the humbler o r i g i n s of t h e i r parentage: f o r example, Belcher (storekeeper); Belknap ( l e a t h e r w o r k e r ) ; Brown ( b l a c k s m i t h ) ; Thornton ( c a r p e n t e r ) . But the r i s e to s o c i a l and economic prominance i n Boston's r u l i n g merchant c l a s s was r e s t r i c t e d to a small p r o p o r t i o n 21 of a r t i s a n s and t h e i r o f f s p r i n g . Nevertheless, among the a r t i s a n s of Boston who e v e n t u a l l y s e t t l e d on economic, s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l rungs somewhere between employed or sub-contracting journeymen and merchant s t a t u s , most d i d leave behind some property and estate and sons t r a i n e d i n a p r o f i t a b l e c r a f t . That legacy was a small measure of the s e c u r i t y and s t a t i o n they sought\" to a t t a i n through t h e i r 22 v o c a t i o n a l s k i l l s and t h e i r l a b o r s . 231 NOTES CHAPTER V I I BCR, V o l . 14, pp. 220-222, 238-40, 280-82 contains members of a r t i s a n ' s committees and describes the \" l e a d i n g \" tradesmen and r e t a i l e r s as being r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the upper l e v e l s of c r a f t s groups. 2 Joseph Moxon, Mechanick E x e r c i s e s : or the D o c t r i n e of Handiworks, A p p l i e d i n the A r t s of Smithing, J o i n e r y , Carpentry, Turning, B r i c k l a y e r y (London: 1703) (copy at Kress L i b r a r y , Harvard); W i l l i a m P a i n , The P r a c t i c a l House Carpenter (Boston: 1796); The Town and Country B u i l d e r ' s A s s i s t a n t (Boston: 1786); The Carpenters' Rules of Work i n the Town of Boston (Boston: 1795). 3M. Arch. MSS., V o l . 59, pp. 391-4, 430, \"Thomas Gunter B u i l d i n g Account\"; Baker MSS, \"James R u s s e l l Receipt Books.\" 4 \"Gunter Account.\" On carpenters arranging f o r t h e i r own m a t e r i a l s , see \"James R u s s e l l Receipt Books,\" \"Pearson Family Accounts,\" \" P a l f r e y Accounts\"; See a l s o , C a r l Bridenbaugh, C o l o n i a l Craftsmen (Chicago: 1950), pp. 65-96. ~*The Town and Country B u i l d e r ' s A s s i s t a n t ; passim, MHS Misc. Bd. MSS, (1702-3)(1704)(1709)(1725)(1739-40), a l l c o n s t r u c t i o n accounts. \" L e t t e r s of John Cotman\" (1745). I b i d . On the b u i l d i n g supply i n d u s t r y , see BCR, V o l . 14, pp. 220-82. 7M. Arch., V o l . 59, pp. 367-8, \"Benjamin H a l l o w e l l ' s Report\"; BCR, V o l . 14, pp. 238-40; G.H. P r e b l e , \" E a r l y S h i p b u i l d i n g i n Massach-u s e t t s , \" NEGHR 23 (1869), pp. 38-41. g BCR, V o l . 14, pp. 238-41; Annie Thwing, Crooked and Narrow S t r e e t s of Boston (Boston: 1920), Chapter 1. BCR, V o l . 15, p. 369; Shattuck, Census, pp. 206, 42-65; Thwing, Crooked and Narrow S t r e e t s . 232 \"^MHS, \"Thwing Catalogue\" and Boston Town Papers, V o l s . 1-7. See a l s o , f o r 1711 f i r e , BCR, V o l . 11, pp. 148, 152-157. There were other major f i r e s i n 1691, 1702, 1759, 1760. On numbers of r e s i d e n t i a l houses b u i l t a n n u a l l y , see BCR, V o l s . 7-20, indexed under \"houses\" and \" d w e l l i n g s . \" On f i r e s i n c o l o n i a l Boston, see MHS C o l l e c t i o n s , V o l . 1, pp. 81 f f ; V o l . 3, pp. 241 f f . ^ S , \"Thwing Catalogue\" contains e x t r a c t s from the e n t i r e extant S u f f o l k County Deed and Probate Records f o r the seventeenth and eighteenth c e n t u r i e s . Bruce D a n i e l s , \" D e f i n i n g Economic Classes i n C o l o n i a l Massachusetts, 1700-1776,\" AAS Proc. 83 (1973), pp. 251-59. 12 For property v a l u e s , see M. Arch., V o l s . 130-134, \" V a l u a t i o n s of Towns.\" For the meaning of property to Boston workers, see G.B. Warden, \"The D i s t r i b u t i o n of Property i n Boston, 1692-1789,\" P e r s p e c t i v e s i n American H i s t o r y 10 (1976), pp. 81-128, e s p e c i a l l y p. 121. 13 Baker MSS, \"Jacob Nash Accounts\"; \"Edward Ma r r e t t Daybooks\"; \"Dan i e l Rea Daybooks.\" BCR, V o l s . 7-20, indexed under \" r e t a i l e r s , \" \" t r a d e s \" and \" l i c e n s e s . \" 1 4BCR, V o l . 17,;:pp. 161-2, 222, 239, 259, 260, 296; J.R. Commons, et^ a l . , H i s t o r y of Labor i n the United S t a t e s , V o l . 1 (New York: 1918), David J . Saposs s e c t i o n , pp. 25-168. 15 MHS MSS, \"Joseph Belknap Ledgers.\" According to Massachusetts laws, Belknap could not manipulate the p r i c e s charged by and the stan-dards of the work of h i s c o n t r a c t i n g a r t i s a n s ; nor could he have a tanner, f o r example, do l e a t h e r d r e s s i n g . See C o l o n i a l Laws, pp. 88-90, and passim f o r other trades. See a l s o Acts and Resolves, V o l . I , pp. 312-14. 1 6 B a k e r MSS, \"V.S. C l a r k Notes,\" Box 2; Blanche Hazard, The Org a n i z a t i o n of the Boot and Shoe Industry i n Massachusetts Before 1875 (Cambridge: 1921). \" ^ H i s t o r y of Labor,-, pp. 25-168. 18 V.S. C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufactures i n the United S t a t e s , 1607-1860 (Washington: 1916), pp. 144-158. 19 A.M. S c h l e s i n g e r , The C o l o n i a l Merchants and the American R e v o l u t i o n ( r e p r i n t , New York: 1968), pp. 15-31. G.B. Warden, Boston, 1689-1776 (Boston: 1970), Chapters 2 to 5. 233 For e s p e c i a l l y good examples of the s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l and economic a c t i v i t i e s of Boston's r i c h e s t merchants see MHS \"Hancock Papers\"; \"Robert Treat Paine Papers\"; \" E z e k i a l P r i c e Papers\"; \"Davis Papers.\" Houghton MSS, \" P a l f r e y Papers.\" For a l i s t of Boston's 200 or so most economically i n f l u e n t i a l c i t i z e n s i n the 1750s, see A r t i c l e s of the S o c i e t y f o r Encouraging Industry and Employing the Poor (Boston, r e p r i n t e d 1754). For g e n e a l o g i c a l data concerning the o r i g i n s and backgrounds of Boston's senior merchant c l a s s , see MHS, \"Merchants\" catalogue, \"Thwing Catalogue\" and W.H. Whitmore, Massachusetts C i v i l L i s t f o r the C o l o n i a l and P r o v i n c i a l P e r i o d s , 1630-1774 (Albany: 1870). 21 l b I d . , e s p e c i a l l y \"Thwing Catalogue\"; Mass. C i v i l L i s t ; A r t i c l e s of the So c i e t y. I b i d . , Warden, \" D i s t r i b u t i o n of Property,\" pp. 81-128. CHAPTER V I I I THE UNSKILLED WORKER IN BOSTON The u n s k i l l e d worker i n p r o v i n c i a l Boston, untrained and unapprenticed and possessing only l i m i t e d work s k i l l s , was not i n -volved i n the town's major i n d u s t r i e s to any great extent. Boston's manufacturing, c o n s t r u c t i o n , merchandising, s h i p p i n g , s e r v i c e s and r e t a i l i n g economies, r e q u i r e d more s k i l l e d than u n s k i l l e d l a b o r , and the small and mostly p e r s o n a l i z e d s c a l e of most businesses d i d not need s i g n i f i c a n t amounts of pu r e l y manual or even p a r t l y - s k i l l e d labor.\"'\" There was, however, a r e s i d e n t p o p u l a t i o n of l a b o r e r s i n the Boston economy which was adapted to the other requirements of the town's economy. These l a b o r e r s were employed i n the town's \"hea v i e r \" i n d u s t r i e s — on the docks and wharves as handlers of goods and raw m a t e r i a l s i n t r a n s i t and storage and i n the yards and warehouses of the l e a t h e r yards, slaughter houses and c o n s t r u c t i o n m a t e r i a l s u p p l i e r s . Some were employed as f u l l - o r part-time helpers to the b u s i e r trades-men i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n or manufacturing s e c t o r . But here, as every-where i n the Boston economy, the demand f o r l a b o r e r s was sometimes v a r i a b l e and always in v o l v e d small numbers. There was no s i n g l e employer who demanded l a r g e numbers of u n s k i l l e d workers. Most p r o v i n c i a l a r t i s a n s d i d a consi d e r a b l e amount of t h e i r own preparatory, a n c i l l a r y and manual work. Even the movement of goods through Boston's waterfront f a c i l i t i e s where manual l a b o r was r e g u l a r l y r e q u i r e d , was 234 235 o f t e n handled on a small s c a l e by the i n d i v i d u a l warehouser or r e c e i v e r 2 or shipper. C e r t a i n l y , l a b o r e r s d i d not c o n s t i t u t e a m a j o r i t y of the working p o p u l a t i o n of Boston, or even the l a r g e s t p l u r a l i t y , but the town's u n s k i l l e d workers d i d represent an important group. The c o n d i t i o n s , a c t i v i t i e s and s t a t u s of these workers can enlarge the p i c t u r e of the i n f l u e n c e s of work on the s o c i a l l i v e s of p r o v i n c i a l Bostonians. In r u r a l Massachusetts the c e n t r a l and dominant economic :. i n f l u e n c e on the l a b o r e r was subsistence a g r i c u l t u r e . As an asset and a p r e l i m i n a r y means of s u f f i c i e n c y and working f o r o t h e r s , as an a l t e r n a t i v e and complementary source of l i v e l i h o o d , farming served as a foundation f o r the r u r a l l a b o r e r ' s personal economy. The f l u i d nature of the r u r a l n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l economy provided the l a b -orer w i t h a f u r t h e r , p r e d i c t a b l e l a b o r o u t l e t and means of income. In r u r a l Massachusetts the presence of s i g n i f i c a n t numbers of l a b o r e r s was necessary to the labor-exchange method of farming. He was assured an acceptable l e v e l of economic s e c u r i t y and s o c i a l con-d i t i o n and place i n the community because the r u r a l \" u n s k i l l e d worker\" — the husbandman and the farm l a b o r e r — was considered v i t a l to the l o c a l economies and c o n s t i t u t e d the l a r g e s t s i n g l e p l u r a l i t y of the r u r a l p o p u l a t i o n . There were wide c o n t r a s t s between the s t a t u s of l a b o r e r s i n Boston and the r o l e and q u a n i t i t i e s of u n s k i l l e d workers i n the a g r i c u l t u r a l towns. Boston's economy provided no s i n g l e a c t -i v i t y to which a l l u n s k i l l e d workers could t u r n as a b a s i s f o r sub-s i s t e n c e . ^..Boston's economy demanded s p e c i a l i z e d , f u l l - t i m e s i n g l e 236 occupations, and i n h i b i t e d c r o s s - v o c a t i o n a l m o b i l i t y . The opportun-i t i e s f o r steady, r e g u l a r employment f o r l a b o r e r s i n Boston were hampered e q u a l l y by the town's l a c k of a s i n g l e i n d u s t r i a l base and 3 by the f u l l - t i m e , s p e c i a l i z e d r e s o u r c e f u l n e s s of i t s a r t i s a n s . As noted p r e v i o u s l y , a v a i l a b l e data i n d i c a t e that of a white adu l t male working pop u l a t i o n of n e a r l y 3,000 i n 1750, fewer than one-f i f t h of that number were u n s k i l l e d . Over h a l f the workers of Boston were s k i l l e d a r t i s a n s and c r a f t s r e t a i l e r s , and another approximately o n e - f i f t h were merchants, l a r g e and s m a l l , s e r v i c e workers such as barbers and ta v e r n e r s , p r o f e s s i o n a l s and f u l l time government o f f i c i a l s . A f u r t h e r 5% were r e t i r e d , unemployed and s i c k and lame. Fewer than 5% of Boston's a d u l t white p o p u l a t i o n were i n short term s e r v i t u d e (Table V I ) . The f i g u r e of 20% u n s k i l l e d s h r i n k s when n o n - a r t i s a n , but s e m i - s k i l l e d , s p e c i a l t i e s are deducted: ferrymen, boatmen, p o r t e r s , shoremen (dock workers) and chimneysweeps were u s u a l l y unapprenticed and d i d not r e q u i r e c r a f t s c r e d e n t i a l s , but these workers were occupied f u l l time i n t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e semi-or p a r t l y -4 s k i l l e d f u n c t i o n s and were not l a b o r e r s i n any r e a l sense. A l a b o r e r i n p r o v i n c i a l Boston was a .day l a b o r e r , and possessed no s i n g l e source of p r o t r a c t e d u n s k i l l e d employment. These were the t o t a l l y u n s k i l l e d workers of the town, having no trade and no f i x e d marketable s e r v i c e s k i l l . A l a r g e permanent f o r c e of u n s k i l l e d workers, performing only manual and menial tasks was not r e q u i r e d by the Boston economy and d i d not e x i s t . In f a c t , what marginal, sporadic and day to day need there was f o r u n s k i l l e d l a b o r was f i l l e d by the l a b o r i n g servants 237 and bonded negroes of more prosperous a r t i s a n s and trades entrepre-neurs and by f r e e negroes and those landed seamen who were between or had terminated voyage c o n t r a c t s . Though i t was not l a r g e , there was an i d e n t i f i a b l e u n s k i l l e d l a b o r p o p u l a t i o n i n p r o v i n c i a l Boston, and i t was made up l a r g e l y of f r e e b l a c k s and landed seamen.^ During the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , as many as 1,500, and as few as 400, f r e e and bonded b l a c k s , males and females, a d u l t s and c h i l d r e n , l i v e d i n Boston; throughout, roughly two-thirds were males and two-t h i r d s of those were a d u l t s . Free negroes comprised as l i t t l e as 30% i n 1690, and as much as 60% i n 1760, of the t o t a l number of b l a c k s . The b l a c k p o p u l a t i o n of Boston rose along w i t h the general p o p u l a t i o n inc r e a s e from some 400 i n 1690 to over 1,500 i n the e a r l y 1750s, and d e c l i n e d t h e r e a f t e r to about 850 i n 1765. The percentage of f r e e b l a c k s increased as a p r o p o r t i o n of the t o t a l , throughout the p e r i o d . The l a r g e s t number of f r e e male a d u l t b l a c k s i n Boston i n the e i g h t -eenth century probably was 300, a number that diminished s t e a d i l y as f r e e negroes f l e d Boston f o r other p a r t s of the province and elsewhere i n New England. The importance of these f i g u r e s and trends i s that they i n d i c a t e that as the r a t i o of f r e e b l a c k s to slaves r o s e , the t o t a l number i n the town decreased. Almost a l l f r e e and bonded bl a c k s were u n s k i l l e d . The f l i g h t of f r e e b l a c k s from Boston, to sea or to other r e g i o n s , suggests a l a c k of demand f o r t h e i r u n s k i l l e d l a b o r i n Boston. C e r t a i n l y t h i s m i g r a t i o n cannot be explained simply i n terms of l o c a l s o c i a l , economic and v o c a t i o n a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n 238 against f r e e negroes; s i m i l a r p r e j u d i c e s e x i s t e d everywhere i n p r o v i n c i a l New England and i n degree throughout the E n g l i s h c o l o n i e s of America. C l e a r l y , many f r e e b l a c k s l e f t Boston to f i n d work as u n s k i l l e d l a b o r and not to seek more l e g a l or s o c i a l t o l e r a n c e . 7 The common seamen who manned Boston's t r a d i n g f l e e t l i k e w i s e formed a measurable p l u r a l i t y of workers. In the p e r i o d between 1720 and 1750, some 600 s a i l o r s were employed on Boston-based v e s s e l s at any given time. And as many as 200 of these men would be g ashore, between s a i l i n g s , f o r up to s e v e r a l months at a time. Moreover, there was a r e g u l a r turnover among mariners, as men took to the sea f o r a l i v i n g f o r l i m i t e d periods of from one voyage to s e v e r a l years s e r v i c e and returned to permanent residence and work ashore. In s h o r t , there was a constant presence of s a i l o r s i n Boston who were between c o n t r a c t s or e n t e r i n g or l e a v i n g the s e r v i c e . But the numbers who chose to r e s i d e i n Boston during t h e i r time ashore was n e g l i g i b l e . Of the s e v e r a l hundred men r e g u l a r l y employed on Boston s h i p s , at l e a s t h a l f came from r u r a l Massachusetts, u s u a l l y l a n d l e s s , u n s k i l l e d sons of husbandmen, young men who had s e l e c t e d the sea as both a means of l i v e l i h o o d and to save f o r f u t u r e economic independence. Between s a i l i n g s or at the f i n a l t e r m i n a t i o n of c o n t r a c t s , these men returned to t h e i r r u r a l homes. I t was not unusual to f i n d a few \"mariners\" and \"seamen\" l i s t e d among the i n h a b i t a n t s 9 of small i n l a n d a g r i c u l t u r a l towns i n Massachusetts. Thus, fewer than h a l f of the por t ' s s a i l o r s chose to l i v e i n Boston when ashore, temp o r a r i l y or permanently. Therefore, the c h i e f sources of Boston's l a b o r i n g p o p u l a t i o n were f l o a t i n g and t r a n s i e n t c l a s s e s , the surplus of which was s c a t t e r e d elsewhere i n the Massachusetts and New England economies. There, u n s k i l l e d l a b o r might f i n d work and more s u i t a b l e v o c a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t y , than was a v a i l a b l e i n Boston. I f Boston's commercial economy o f f e r e d no major employer to a t t r a c t and hold a l a r g e body of u n s k i l l e d workers, nevertheless there was one area of p u b l i c employment that provided a reason f o r some f r e e b l a c k s , ex-mariners and other u n s k i l l e d workers to remain i n town. The c i v i c government of Boston i t s e l f was a major employer of men i n the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d . \" ^ To put t h i s i n t o p e r s p e c t i v e , Boston was more h e a v i l y populated that s i x of the province's eleven c o u n t i e s , and as many people l i v e d i n Boston as i n the r e s t of S u f f o l k county, i n which the town was s i t u a t e d . The p u b l i c works and i n s t a l -l a t i o n s that elsewhere would be spread over s e v e r a l hundred square m i l e s of an a g r i c u l t u r a l county were concentrated, a l b e i t i n a d i f f e r e n t arrangement, w i t h i n a few thousand acres i n B o s t o n . ^ The p u b l i c works of Boston consumed a cons i d e r a b l e o u t l a y of finances and l a b o r . The annual Town budget f o r p u b l i c works and s e r v i c e s was l a r g e r than the annual budgets of most of the town's i n d i v i d u a l com-12 m e r c i a l and i n d u s t r i a l e n t e r p r i s e s . As a c o n t r a c t o r , the l o c a l government was the l a r g e s t s i n g l e s source of work and s e r v i c e f o r the town's a r t i s a n s , entrepreneurs and m a t e r i a l p r o v i s i o n e r s , and i t was by f a r the s i n g l e most important employer of men, d i r e c t l y and i n d i r -e c t l y . That i s not to say that the Town of Boston represented a d i s t i n c t economic and occupational a l t e r n a t i v e to the town's primary and major 240 p r i v a t e e n t e r p r i s e s . C e r t a i n l y the combined value of e i t h e r s h i p -b u i l d i n g , other manufacturing or p r i v a t e c o n s t r u c t i o n f a r outweighed that of the p u b l i c economy. But as a s i n g l e c o n c e n t r a t i o n of funds and la b o r needs, the Town was a very i n f l u e n t i a l economic f a c t o r and 13 i t was the l a r g e s t s i n g l e employer of u n s k i l l e d l a b o r . Apart from the operation of i t s p o l i t i c a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a u t h o r i t y , the government of Boston — that i s , the Town Meeting — b u i l t , owned, managed and maintained an extensive number of b u i l d i n g s , and p u b l i c f a c i l i t i e s and conducted v a r i e d p u b l i c works. A p a r t i a l l i s t of the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the Town Meeting would i n c l u d e the almshouse, workhouse, Town House (Meeting House), s e v e r a l o f f i c i a l r e s i d e n c e s , the p u b l i c market, granary, p u b l i c wharf, p r i s o n , four or f i v e p u b l i c schools, s e v e r a l f i r e engines and barns, two separate gun b a t t e r i e s , v a r i o u s and extensive w a l l and t u r r e t f o r t i f i c a t i o n s , s e v e r a l b r i d g e s , two graveyards and more than f o r t y s t r e e t s of d i f -14 f e r i n g widths and lengths and over s i x t y smaller lanes and a l l e y s . I m p e r i a l and p r o v i n c i a l p r o p e r t i e s , though they were the r e s p o n s i b i l -i t i e s of senior government, were p a r t l y administered by l o c a l a u t h o r i t y and were b u i l t and maintained by Boston i n t e r e s t s . These included o f f i c i a l r e s i d e n c e s , courts and customs houses, the l a r g e C a s t l e W i l l i a m m i l i t a r y establishment w i t h i t s 120 guns, and the p r o v i n c i a l l i g h t h o u s e , both i n Boston harbor, and the Province House, the seat of the General Court. Most of these were s u b s t a n t i a l prop-e r t i e s and were erected and maintained by c o n t r a c t o r s and a r t i s a n s who otherwise engaged i n the town's p r i v a t e c o n s t r u c t i o n economy.^ The r e a l value of these i n s t a l l a t i o n s to the workers of Boston was i n 241 improvement, r e p a i r , a d d i t i o n s and replacements. Each year, scores of c o n t r a c t s were issued to i n d i v i d u a l f o r l i m i t e d work; to c o n t r a c t o r s who organized s e v e r a l trades f o r more ambitious or elaborate work; and o c c a s i o n a l l y to p a r t n e r s h i p s of a r t i s a n - c o n t r a c t o r s f o r l a r g e p r o j e c t s such as the eight-month c o n s t r u c t i o n of r e t a i n i n g w a l l s near the dam on the town's o u t s k i r t s or the year-long c o n t r a c t f o r abutments and supports f o r the town's l a r g e s t b r i d g e . X ^ C o n s t r u c t i o n and the r e g u l a r r e p a i r and maintenance of p u b l i c works kept many a r t i s a n s and c o n t r a c t o r s f u l l y employed, many f o r periods of months and even years. Furthermore, the p r o v i s i o n of ser-v i c e s and commodities to p u b l i c i n s t i t u t i o n s was a minor boon to many r e t a i l e r s , merchants and some craftsmen who came to be i n the i n d i r e c t employ of the Town. So r e l i a b l e and l u c r a t i v e were the Town's m a t e r i a l and l a b o r needs that a number of a r t i s a n s and businessmen came to depend upon them as a p r i n c i p a l or s o l e source of income. C o n s t r u c t i o n was l i n k e d to growth, of course, and when Boston's pop-u l a t i o n and economy s t a b i l i z e d a f t e r 1740, s t r u c t u r a l maintenance an'd r e p a i r became the most common p u b l i c b u i l d i n g works. This diminished the scope and value of i n d i v i d u a l work c o n t r a c t s . R e s i d u a l smaller tasks appealed t o , and a t t r a c t e d , i n d i v i d u a l a r t i s a n s , and the d i s t -r i b u t i o n of p u b l i c c o n t r a c t s , by b i d and sometimes by d i r e c t appoint-ment, correspondingly was very widespread. In some years over one hundred i n d i v i d u a l s debited the Town accounts f o r l a b o r , s e r v i c e or 1 17 m a t e r i a l charges. Large-scale c o n t r a c t i n g continued w i t h o c c a s i o n a l 242 new l a r g e c o n s t r u c t i o n p r o j e c t s or more frequent major r e p a i r s and r e h a b i l i t a t i o n s . But the most necessary and r e g u l a r item of Boston's p u b l i c works was s t r e e t and wharf improvement, enlargement and main-tenance. I t was there that Boston's l a r g e s t p u b l i c works c o n t r a c t o r s t h r i v e d and where the town's u n s k i l l e d l a b o r e r s were most c o n s i s t e n t l y 18 needed and employed. S t r e e t paving c o n t r a c t s were taken u s u a l l y by s p e c i a l t y b r i c k -l a y e r s ( b r i c k s being the only contemporary paving m a t e r i a l ) . A major s i n g l e p r o j e c t , l a s t i n g three to s i x months, employed about twenty f u l l - t i m e l a b o r e r s . The c o n t r a c t o r i n these p u b l i c works was respon-s i b l e f o r m a t e r i a l s and wages and b i l l e d the Town f o r gross, but : t i t e m i z e d , charges that included' those expenditures and h i s own personal s e r v i c e s expenses. These l a t t e r amounts were measured i n c o s t s f o r \"my work',\"1 \"my time\" or \"my o v e r s i g h t \" ( s u p e r v i s i o n and o r g a n i z a t i o n ) . The c o n t r a c t o r s h i r e d l a b o r e r s d i r e c t l y or through any sub-contractors who might be i n v o l v e d . Always, the c o n t r a c t o r , i f he normally employed a white servant, f r e e or bound negro, or part time l a b o r e r - h e l p e r , would i n c l u d e that man i n the work and add h i s wages se p a r a t e l y on the i n v o i c e s he presented to the Town. S t r e e t work a l s o employed masons, some carpenters and b l a c k s m i t h s , f o r p o s t s , boardwalks and metal s t r e e t i n l a y s , and a great many c a r t e r s . For c a r t e r s , a l e s s p r o f i t a b l e trade than most o t h e r s , as w e l l as f o r l a b o r e r s , s t r e e t work provided a steady means of subsistence. The absence of even rudimentary mechanical c. equipment f o r b u i l d i n g , paving, widening, lengthening and m a i n t a i n i n g 243 even unpaved s t r e e t s and lanes meant that gangs of men c o n s t a n t l y were at work i n the thoroughfares of Boston i n a l l but the most severe winter months; and then, i n periods of thaw, l a b o r e r s would be out to continue 19 a p r o j e c t or complete an u n f i n i s h e d c o n t r a c t . I t was i n such work gangs that Boston's r e s i d e n t f r e e negroes and o t h e r w i s e - i d l e seamen found r e g u l a r employment. Others found work there too: the a r t i s a n ' s casual h e l p e r , the i d l e shoreman or p o r t e r and many others who sought employment i n the inconstant Boston u n s k i l l e d l a b o r market, could f i l l i n the year's working days i n s t r e e t work. Manuacturing and s h i p b u i l d i n g d i d not r e q u i r e any s i g n i f i c a n t number of u n s k i l l e d workers, except i r r e g u l a r l y and i n d i r e c t l y , and most house, commercial and p u b l i c b u i l d i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n u t i l i z e d only a few of the town's f r e e u n s k i l l e d workers. The e r e c t i o n of major r e p a i r of dams, bridges and f o r t i f i c a t i o n s was too infrequent to be a dependable source of l i v e l i h o o d f o r l a b o r e r s . But work on Boston's s t r e e t s and wharves, which were included as s t r e e t s : ' i n p u b l i c c o n t r a c t s , was a p r e d i c t a b l e means of income f o r the u n s k i l l e d . Upward of one hundred Boston l a b o r e r s were employed i n t h i s a c t i v i t y i n any year and a s i z e a b l e number der i v e d a l l or a m a j o r i t y of t h e i r incomes from i t . In summary, Boston d i d have a constant p o p u l a t i o n of u n s k i l l e d workers, but i t was small and was comprised mostly of part-time or e r s t w h i l e s a i l o r s and of f r e e b l a c k s ; and i f the l o c a l economy provided a s i n g l e mode of employment f o r these workers, i t was i n p u b l i c works 1 20 and c h i e f l y i n s t r e e t , highway and a l l e y work. 244 The reasons f o r men a c h i e v i n g adulthood i n Boston without l e a r n i n g a recognized, formal and u s e f u l trade were matters of p a r e n t a l means and i n f l u e n c e or of i n d i v i d u a l c h a r a c t e r , p e r s o n a l i t y the f a m i l y ' s economic circumstances during the male's adolescence. To be u n s k i l l e d i n Boston was to be handicapped or even prevented from reaching the s o c i e t y ' s minimum standards of income and property. The u n s k i l l e d worker married l a t e r than the s k i l l e d worker, i f a t a l l , supported fewer c h i l d r e n and l i v e d a f a r l e s s commodious l i f e than 21 d i d the ord i n a r y a r t i s a n . He had l e s s o p portunity to secure savings, c r e d i t or property f o r h i s o l d age, h i s f a m i l y ' s comfort or h i s c h i l d r e n ' s i n h e r i t a n c e . I t was not the s t r a i n of monotony or the -extreme p h y s i c a l demands of u n s k i l l e d l a b o r that made h i s p o s i t i o n u n a t t r a c t i v e and p e r s o n a l l y u n f u l f i l l i n g — p r a c t i c a l l y a l l men i n p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y encountered some drudgery and manual work, whether they were farmers, a r t i s a n s or small merchants. Rather i t was the r e s t r i c t i o n s placed on h i s income and personal f i n a n c i a l s e l f - r e l i a n c e and the l i m i t e d choices f o r advancement that made u n s k i l l e d l a b o r i n g an untenable and d i f f i c u l t v o c a t i o n . To some extent h i s d i e t a r y and c l o t h i n g needs could be assured by masters and term employers, and, during unemployment, by c h a r i t y . But i n any event h i s wage r a t e r e -mained approximately h a l f that of the a r t i s a n . These d a i l y wage r a t e s were set l e g a l l y , p e r i o d i c a l l y , the General Court and in v o l v e d f i n e s and punishment f o r v i o l a t i o n s . In the case of a r t i s a n s , some 245 r a t e s were set by a process of p e t i t i o n and n e g o t i a t i o n between the \"c o r p o r a t i o n s \" of s p e c i f i c Boston trades and the Court. But most s k i l l e d work was set at equal r a t e s f o r a l l c r a f t s . The d a i l y r a t e f o r blacksmith's work i n 1730 was four s h i l l i n g s ; i t was the same f o r carpent e r s , masons, tanners, shoemakers and other a r t i s a n s . The d a i l y r a t e f o r \" l a b o r e r s \" — a l e g a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n meaning unap-p r e n t i c e d , or unlicensed as a \" p o r t e r \" or \" c a r t e r \" f o r e x a m p l e — were set a r b i t r a r i l y by the General Court. These r a t e s were set at between one-half and two-thirds of the average r a t e f o r a r t i s a n s ; there was another ratee f o r l a b o r e r s set at o n e - t h i r d the a r t i s a n ' s pay, i f the l a b o r e r was \"found\" during h i s employment. I t i s of some s i g n i f i c a n c e that a r t i s a n s and s e m i - s k i l l e d s e r v i c e workers could c i r -cumvent \"wage r a t e s \" by n e g o t i a t i n g w i t h c l i e n t s or employers on a piece-work, sub-contracting or finished-commodity b a s i s , where v a r i a b l e s such as time.materials and d i s t a n c e ( f o r c a r t e r s , f o r example) could be manipulated. U n l i k e the othe r s , the \" l a b o r e r \" i n Boston was1 u s u a l l y employed and paid by the day. In that case, the l a b o r e r ' s means to enlarge h i s income by c o n t r a c t i n g , and thus increase h i s c o n t r o l over h i s work and h i s f u t u r e by energy and d e x t e r i t y , were 22 v i r t u a l l y non-existant. When f u l l y employed, the wage income of an u n s k i l l e d day la b o r e r would b a r e l y meet the annual b a s i c food, c l o t h i n g and modest i rented s h e l t e r expenses f o r a man, a w i f e and two young c h i l d r e n , even when the w i f e produced e x t r a income by s p i n n i n g , sewing or launderingy; 246 Food alone, f o r four people, consumed over h a l f of a day l a b o r e r ' s combined household income. And the upshot of the l a b o r e r ' s p l i g h t , i n that regard, was that he could not p o s s i b l y a f f o r d any meagre l u x -u r i e s or added comforts, or even good q u a l i t y f u r n i t u r e or household f i x t u r e s . Nor could he educate h i s c h i l d r e n or arrange f o r v o c a t i o n a l t r a i n i n g f o r them. Moreover, any i l l n e s s , unexpected expenses or prolonged c u r t a i l m e n t of income was tantamount to ch a r i t y - s u p p o r t e d poverty. At the best of times i t was a precarious c o n d i t i o n i n which the Boston l a b o r e r could not hope to e l e v a t e h i s economic and s o c i a l p o s i t i o n . U n l i k e the p o s i t i o n of the r u r a l l a b o r e r , i t was not a l i f e that was acceptably s t a b l e . I t was not a s t a t u s that was endured by a l l Boston l a b o r e r s . The Boston economy d i d not encourage an abundance of u n s k i l l e d l a b o r e r s , and f o r that important m i n o r i t y who formed the, town's l a b o r i n g p o p u l a t i o n , there was no i n c e n t i v e to remain 23 i n that c o n d i t i o n . Apart from the employment o f f e r e d by p u b l i c works, which at best af f o r d e d a measure of sub s i s t e n c e , the u n s k i l l e d worker had to seek support and s e c u r i t y i n the i n t e r s t i c e s of the town's p r i v a t e economy. Always, there was a need f o r some u n s k i l l e d l a b o r , of course, but i t was i r r e g u l a r and tenuous — a day here, and a few days there, and the constant t h r e a t of abbreviated income was always present. At times there were genuine shortages of u n s k i l l e d labor i n Boston, but these were not f i x e d by any s i n g l e i n d u s t r y , f u n c t i o n , l o c a t i o n or season. A l a b o r e r might have a few days work sawing wood f o r a carpenter, or unloading a s h i p , or packing hides at dockside or any number of short term assignments, and repeat the c y c l e throughout the year and not miss a day's work. But he found very l i t t l e permanent and guaranteed employment of a k i n d that would a l l o w him to pl a n h i s l i f e against a guaranteed f u t u r e income or o b t a i n l i m i t e d c r e d i t f o r immediate m a t e r i a l improvement. Thus, when penury or the l a c k of a s e t t l e d v o c a t i o n a l place i n the community became ins u p p o r t a b l e , the l a b o r e r attempted to f i n d a more s u i t a b l e , long-term s o l u t i o n to h i s v o c a t i o n a l predicament. Many followed the r u r a l example of v o l u n t a r y l i m i t e d - t e r m s e r v i t u d e or a d u l t a p p r e n t i c e s h i p . But the former r e q u i r e d acute desperation or the pressure of an unpayable debt, and 24 the l a t t e r was normally contingent on p r o p i t i o u s t i m i n g . Many d i s s a t i s f i e d l a b o r e r s became seamen f o r temporary or permanent r e l i e f , and perpetuated the r o t a t i o n of maritime t r a n s i e n c e and r e s i d e n t i a l u n s k i l l e d l a b o r . When Boston's sometimes e r r a t i c economy caused r e c e s s i o n and threatened to reduce employment or aggravated the i n s t a b i l i t y of the u n s k i l l e d , some l e f t f o r other c o a s t a l or a g r i c u l t u r a l towns — although i n both instances there was always the d i f f i c u l t y of o b t a i n i n g r e s i d e n t s t a t u s . S t i l l others .* remained i n Boston and managed to gain access to some lower s k i l l e d t r a d e s , as f u l l - t i m e p o r t e r s , shoremen and l e a t h e r handlers, f o r ex-ample. There at l e a s t , . because of t r a d i t i o n a l trades o r g a n i z a t i o n and p r o t e c t i o n i s m , — p o r t e r s , f o r example, helped the Town Meeting 248 r e g u l a t e t h e i r numbers and set t h e i r r a t e s — permanent and more l u c -r a t i v e work could be secured and a measure of f i n a n c i a l independence could be enjoyed. In some cases, medium-term s e r v i t u d e of from one to three years l e d to t r a i n i n g i n s p e c i a l i z e d n o n - a r t i s a n a u x i l i a r y occupations. I f a master or contracted-term employer were a shoemaker, f o r example', the contracted l a b o r e r might l e a r n l e a t h e r c u t t i n g or h e e l making; tanners' l a b o r e r s learned l e a t h e r s t r e t c h i n g and blacksmiths' helpers a s s i s t e d i n rough f o r g i n g and bellows oper-a t i o n . Laborers who were contracted to masons were taught l a t h making and p l a s t e r mixing and other r e l a t e d tasks and b a s i c trades s k i l l s . The l a b o r e r of a l i c e n s e d small boatmaker or wagon maker was i n s t r u c t e d and permitted to a t t a c h or assemble some p a r t s , always under super-v i s i o n . Any of these and s i m i l a r employments, w h i l e they o f f e r e d c u r r e n t s t a b i l i t y f o r the l a b o r e r , a l s o presented f u t u r e a p p r e n t i c e -ship prospects. 2\"' There were other methods of escaping the s t a t u s of day l a b o r e r f o r the u n s k i l l e d r e s i d e n t of Boston. As w e l l as p r o v i d i n g employment i n contracted p u b l i c works, the Town of Boston d i r e c t l y employed many men i n f u l l - t i m e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and o f f i c i a l s e r v i c e s c a p a c i t i e s . The Town re q u i r e d many and assorted p u b l i c s e r v i c e s and possessed the budget and a u t h o r i t y to grant e x c l u s i v e l i c e n c e s to i n d i v i d u a l s i n c i v i c employment. Although t e c h n i c a l l y the r e c i p i e n t s of those l i c e n s e s were paid by the users of the s e r v i c e s they provided, and not by the town i t s e l f , monopoly r i g h t s of p r a c t i c e by the grace of the Town and on i t s b e h a l f , marked these occupations as c i v i c employments N a t u r a l l y , some of these s e r v i c e occupations were not a v a i l a b l e to u n s k i l l e d l a b o r e r s — schoolteachers, j a i l e r s and alms master were obvious exceptions. But l a b o r e r s could and d i d o b t a i n permanent and renewable posts as scavengers, who were paid d i r e c t l y from the Town 26 budget, gravediggers, p u b l i c p o r t e r s and p u b l i c g r a i n handlers. The Town issued l i c e n s e s to tavern-keepers and u s u a l l y reserved those favors f o r widows, handicapped men and aged l a b o r e r s . Other permits were given to ferrymen, messengers and l i v e r y keepers, a l l of whom would be otherwise u n s k i l l e d and who were o f t e n funded, f o r stock, f a c i l i t i e s and bonding, by l o c a l merchants, who a l s o used t h e i r i n -27 fluences i n recommending many l a b o r e r s f o r c i v i c l i c e n s e s . Dozens of paid c i v i c a d m i n i s t r a t i o n appointments were made by the Selectmen and v a r i o u s Town Meeting assemblies and committees. I t took about one hundred men to administer and operate the Town's c i v i l and p u b l i c a f f a i r s and most appointments and e l e c t i o n s were mad annually. The r e s p e c t i v e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , a u t h o r i t y , importance and pay of these posts were matched by the personal q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and s o c i a l s t a t u s of the o f f i c e h o l d e r s . Some p o s i t i o n s were completely f u l l - t i m e endeavours and others i n v o l v e d only p e r i o d i c a t t e n t i o n . But very few u n s k i l l e d workers were engaged i n c i v i c a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Among those p o s i t i o n s f i l l e d by the town's business, merchant, p r o f -e s s i o n a l and artis a n - e n t r e p r e n e u r c l e s s , were the e l e c t e d Selectmen, of course, and the Town c l e r k , s e v e r a l tax assessors and c o l l e c t o r s , 250 the keeper of the p u b l i c granary and the master of the p u b l i c wharf, the e i g h t overseers of the poor and the constables. From the town's a r t i s a n s and smaller merchants were drawn the l e a t h e r , lumber and g r a i n s e a l e r s , the heads of the two watches and the v a r i o u s ward f i r e engine masters. Only as members of the Town watch, which involved n e a r l y twenty posts, or o c c a s i o n a l l y as part time members of a f i r e engine crew, were l a b o r e r s involved i n d i r e c t c i v i l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n or s e r v i c e . I t i s worth n o t i n g , i n terms of time and income, that whereas the Town of t e n had problems i n securing a paid appointee — as assessor or con-s t a b l e f o r example, many p r e f e r i n g to pay a f i n e and f i n d a s u b s t i t u t e — there was constant competition f o r the few posts open to l a b o r e r s , e i t h e r as nominated appointees or l i c e n s e e s . In many cases, the labo^ r e r - a p p l i c a n t was favored by the i n t e r c e s s i o n and backing of a l o c a l man of i n f l u e n c e . In the a c q u i s i o n of p u b l i c l i c e n s e s i t was o f t e n the p o l i t i c a l and f i n a n c i a l l a r g e s s e of a p a r t i c u l a r merchant th a t assured the success of a l a b o r e r ' s a p p l i c a t i o n . These ac t s of beneficence were f o r the most p a r t , motivated e i t h e r by concern f o r a cur r e n t or former servant or a d e s i r e to c o n t r o l the poor tax by convenient 28 employment of a r e a l or p o t e n t i a l c h a r i t y case. I f there was a stratum of poor i n p r o v i n c i a l Boston, i t was made up of the town's u n s k i l l e d workers and not of a d e s t i t u t e c l a s s . The m a j o r i t y of the poor i n Boston were working poor, those who were l i v i n g on the margin of subsistence w h i l e normally employed as l a b o r e r s . But i t s membership was not f i x e d . I t s composition changed r e g u l a r l y as men acquired more r e l i a b l e and remunerative s k i l l s and occupations or as they and t h e i r f a m i l i e s q u i t the town. Turnover was frequent and high and there was l i t t l e c o n t i n u i t y i n the f a m i l i e s 29 who remained i n that c o n d i t i o n . Moreover, the u n s k i l l e d worker represented a m i n o r i t y of between 10% and 20% of the town's working po p u l a t i o n and only a f r a c t i o n of that number were bona f i d e impover-ished day l a b o r e r s . S t i l l , many l a b o r e r s and t h e i r f a m i l i e s must be viewed as working poor, and f o r some o c c a s i o n a l and sometimes frequent r e s o r t to o f f i c i a l poor r e l i e f was necessary f o r subsistence. The working poor, d e s p i t e t h e i r r e s t r i c t e d economic and s o c i a l l i v e s , r e t a i n e d some measure of independence and could and d i d escape to b e t t e r c o n d i t i o n s and opportunity. In t h i s regard, the town's merchant and a r t i s a n community d i d much to a l l e v i a t e the poverty of some l a b o r e r s by o f f e r i n g t r a i n i n g , permanent work and promotions. Whether c y n i c a l , to reduce the burden of the poor tax, or as genuine ac t s of c h a r i t y and s o c i a l and moral concern, t h i s method of a i d 30 helped keep down the numbers of working poor. The working poor were d i s t i n g u i s h e d , i n law and s t a t u s , from the i d l e poor, the impious, intemperate and a n t i - s o c i a l r e s i d e n t s whose unemployment was o f t e n d e l i b e r a t e or p r e f e r r e d . Massachusetts law had long made p r o v i s i o n f o r c o n t r o l of t h i s \" v i c e , \" by making l o c a l a u t h o r i t i e s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r i t s r e g u l a t i o n and e r a d i c a t i o n . In the smaller communities t h i s c o n t r o l was exerc i s e d w i t h i n the home and throughout the community by d i r e c t , p e r s o n a l i z e d enforcement and persuasion and by communal s o c i a l pressure. But i n the l a r g e r , impersonal s e t t i n g of Boston, c o n t r o l of i d l e n e s s was i n s t i t u t i o n a -31 l i z e d o u t s i d e the home. The Almshouse and Workhouse i n Boston housed those whose h a b i t s or circumstances marked them as i d l e poor. The d e s t i t u t e , whether l a z y , lame, aged, abandoned youth or widows, were, when p o s s i b l e , sequestered i n those p u b l i c i n s t i t u t i o n s and were made to be productive or were kept occupied. In t h i s way, education and re-education of \"work h a b i t s \" were administered. P o t e n t i a l l y d i s r u p t i v e , c r i m i n a l , or a n t i - s o c i a l elements as w e l l as dependents who were h e l p l e s s or s u s c e p t i b l e to i d l e n e s s , were removed from the s t r e e t s of the town, and a m i l d form of punishment, c o r r e c t i o n or p r o t e c t i o n , by non-penal i n c a r c e r a t i o n was accomplished. Up to 1738, the Almshouse was used as both r e s i d e n t i a l c h a r i t y r e l i e f f o r the town's genuinely incapac-i t a t e d and as a s i t e f o r productive c h a r i t y where the i d l e but h e a l t h y poor could be put to work. A f t e r 1738 the f u n c t i o n s were separated, more as a r e s u l t of increased general p o p u l a t i o n than from a percentage increase of i d l e poor. The Almshouse contained from as few as f i f t y to j u s t over one hundred people, depending on the circumstances of Boston's economy. The Workhouse u s u a l l y held t h i r t y to f i f t y persons engaged i n mandatory employment such as supervised commercial weaving or shoemaking. These f i g u r e s represented the extremes i n the numbers of the town's i n d i g e n t p o p u l a t i o n . And another ten to twenty persons were to be l o c a t e d at any time i n the town j a i l , there as a r e s u l t 32 of debt or p o v e r t y - r e l a t e d crime. For Boston's working poor, marginal subsistence meant a pre-c a r i o u s s o c i a l e x i s t e n c e ; one that was exacerbated by the short-term and i r r e g u l a r work market and by the v a g a r i e s of the Boston commercial economy. Boston's economy and p o p u l a t i o n s t a b i l i z e d i n the 1735-1745 p e r i o d . Some s h i p b u i l d i n g a c t i v i t y had moved north to the other c o a s t a l towns which were nearer the receding timber resources and some of Boston's other i n d u s t r i e s , such as d i s t i l l i n g and l e a t h e r manufact-u r i n g s u f f e r e d stagnation and i n some instances a f a l l i n production. Some small maufacturers removed t h e i r shops and c a p i t a l to other p a r t s of the province and New England, o f t e n f o r tax reasons. Boston's popu l a t i o n d e c l i n e d from a peak of n e a r l y 17,000 i n 1740 to 15,731 33 i n 1752 and remained at roughly that l e v e l u n t i l a f t e r the R e v o l u t i o n . For the s k i l l e d a r t i s a n and small merchant, removal from Boston for economic improvement, or i n the wake of p a r t i c u l a r r e c e s s i o n , meant l i t t l e hardship. They merely followed the r e l o c a t i o n of t h e i r indus-t r i a l a s s o c i a t e s or moved t h e i r marketable s k i l l s to other towns where t h e i r c r a f t s or e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l a b i l i t i e s could be e x p l o i t e d and where economic and s o c i a l v a l u e s , standards and s t a t u s could be continued. For c e r t a i n u n s k i l l e d workers who were dependent on the v a r i o u s p r i v a t e and p u b l i c l a b o r i n g needs of the town's economy, the m i g r a t i o n of a few a r t i s a n s and merchants and a s l i g h t d e c l i n e i n economic a c t i v i t y could be d i s a s t r o u s . As noted, without r e l a t i v e s , backers or a need f o r h i s s e r v i c e s , the l a b o r e r had d i f f i c u l t y i n being \"admitted\" to another town. The Town of Boston i t s e l f p r a c t i c e d a s t r i c t c o n t r o l of incoming p o p u l a t i o n , and at times v i r t u a l l y forbade 34 the admission of u n s k i l l e d workers. The s o c i a l consequences of even s l i g h t economic lapses were p o t e n t i a l l y d e s t r u c t i v e f o r the married u n s k i l l e d l a b o r e r . I f he went to sea he l e f t h i s f a m i l y w i t h an i n -secure income; most s a i l o r s contracted f o r an advance of sea wages and p e r i o d i c sums were paid t h e r e a f t e r to the man's dependents by the c o n t r a c t i n g merchant or ship owner. But those subsequent payments were v a r i a b l e and sometimes i r r e g u l a r f o r they were contingent on the amounts and values of cargoes handled during the contracted voyage. Economic v i c i s s i t u d e s a s i d e , the absence of a f a t h e r created s e r i o u s s o c i a l d i s r u p t i o n i n the homes of the working poor. Many men went to sea and d i d not r e t u r n . Other l a b o r e r s simply abandoned t h e i r f a m i l i e s and f l e d to the west or to other c o l o n i e s . One of the c o r o l l a r i e s of d i s t r e s s e d circumstances, among the working as w e l l as the i d l e poor, was the forced s e r v i t u d e or very e a r l y i n v o l u n t a r y apprenticeship of t h e i r c h i l d r e n . This was a r e g u l a r occurrence w i t h the poor that increased w i t h underemployment. Parents committed t h e i r c h i l d r e n to terms of app r e n t i c e s h i p and s e r v i t u d e of up to f i f t e e n years, and i n the process f o r f e i t e d p a r e n t a l contact and i n f l u e n c e . For orphans, or f o r c h i l d r e n of the d e s t i t u t e , the l e g a l a u t h o r i t y and s e r v i c e arrangements were i n the hands of l o c a l government — the Overseers of the Poor — and the i n i t i a t i v e l a y w i t h those p u b l i c a u t h o r i t i e s . But there were enough examples of v o l u n t a r y commitments by parents to i n d i c a t e the extent and p e r s i s t e n c e of t h i s 255 problem f o r the working poor. I t was a p r a c t i c e as o l d as Boston; i t was heightened i n times of economic u n c e r t a i n t y . Of the male c h i l -dren i n v o l v e d i n t h i s process, n e a r l y h a l f managed to be l o c a t e d i n l o c a l trades and i n d u s t r i e s . The r e s t were sent out of Boston to l e a r n any one of s i x t y trades or occupations, or i n the case of over one-t h i r d of the t o t a l , to farmers, p r i n c i p a l l y as a g r i c u l t u r a l a s s i s t a n t s . V i r t u a l l y a l l the young females i n v o l v e d i n c h i l d s e r v i t u d e went i n t o domestic s e r v i c e . While t h i s p r a c t i c e had the e f f e c t of d e s t r o y i n g or tampering w i t h normal f a m i l y l i f e — sometimes only one i n three of the c h i l d r e n of the working poor were removed — i n many cases i t was the only assurance of any f a m i l y l i f e f o r c e r t a i n c h i l d r e n . The median age of these young indentures was nine but some were as young ,. 35 as f i v e years. This system of c o n t r a c t u a l f o s t e r parentage, and the exteme youth of the indentured, derived from the hardships of the u n s k i l l e d working poor and the d i s j o i n t e d domestic c o n d i t i o n s caused by underemploy-ment, widowhood or chronic penury, and must be considered as r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t from the usual apprenticeshiD o r a c t i c e of t h e , s k i l l e d and solvent u n s k i l l e d workers o f the province. In the l a t t e r event, the c h i l d r e n and youth of more solvent workers were indentured o u t s i d e the home to l e a r n s k i l l s and h a b i t s f o r t h e i r own f u t u r e s e l f - s u f -f i c i e n c y and only a f t e r the c h i l d had spent i t s formative years with'its,own parents. U s u a l l y , c h i l d r e n were at home u n t i l they were t h i r t e e n or fo u r t e e n , and t h e i r indentures were from f i v e to seven years. In the case of Boston's working poor, the reasons f o r s e t t l i n g c h i l d r e n o u t s i d e the home o f t e n r e s u l t e d from an i n a b i l i t y to support 256 those c h i l d r e n . O f f i c i a l a t t i t u d e encouraged these forms of e a r l y and long term indenture of poor c h i l d r e n as a means of reducing the a c t u a l or p o t e n t i a l cost of p u b l i c poor r e l i e f and of upholding the t r a d i t i o n a l P u r i t a n precepts of moral, s o c i a l , f a m i l i a l and v o c a t i o n a l conventions f o r c h i l d r e n who otherwise would be denied those i n f l u e n c e s . 3 ^ Along w i t h the forced or necessary indentures of the town's orphans and the c h i l d r e n of the working poor, f a m i l y d i s l o c a t i o n caused other l o c a l s o c i a l and economic problems — the absence of a male i n the f a m i l y home i s an example of t h i s . An o f f i c i a l tax assessor's.: census of 1742 determined that the t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n of Boston, 16,382, included \"1,200 widows, 1,000 whereof are i n low circumstances.\" Contemporary usage included as \"widows\" a l l married women who happened to be l i v i n g alone. The 1,200 women c i t e d i n the assessor's r e p o r t would c e r t a i n l y i n c l u d e a s u b s t a n t i a l p r o p o r t i o n of \"grass widows1.1, whose husbands were at sea or had permanently or tem p o r a r i l y abandoned the home. But many were genuinely bereaved widows whose husbands had died at sea or i n m i l i t a r y a c t i o n s or from disease or acci d e n t s or 37 had simply, i n o l d age, preceded t h e i r wives. Of the 200 women not deemed to be i n \"low circumstances\", i t can assumed that they were the former wives of successful or prudent a r t i s a n s and merchants and had been w i l l e d adequate esta t e s of property or investment revenues or stock. Some of the troubled 1,000 were a l s o possessors of property but could not s u b s i s t without a d d i t i o n a l income. 257 The m a j o r i t y of the 1,000 \"widows\" who were considered needy, c o n s t i t u t e d another stratum, and a l a r g e one, of both workers and working poor. As such, they served an important f u n c t i o n i n Boston's t e x t i l e and c l o t h i n g economy. V i r t u a l l y a l l the l i n e n and woolen f i b e r s used by Boston's commercial weavers came from the spinning wheels of 38 the town's s i n g l e women; daughters at home, and widows. But f u l l -time spinning could provide only a rough subsistence and many of these independent women were included at times on the town's p o o r - r e l i e f r o l l s . Under a d e l i b e r a t e p o l i c y of Boston's l i c e n s i n g a u t h o r i t y , most tavern, rooming house and e a t i n g shop permits were issued to widows. Many more took servant's work i n the homes of the more a f f l u e n t . But f o r s e v e r a l hundred women i n p r o v i n c i a l Boston, f u l l - t i m e spinning and p e r i o d i c c h a r i t y were the major sources of m a t e r i a l support. The c o n d i t i o n i m p l i c i t i n the term \"low circumstances\" d i d not mean that Boston's working \"widows\" were desperately poor. Rather, . i t appears that t h e i r p o s i t i o n , as low-income and subsistence i n h a b i t a n t s , r e s t r i c t e d t h e i r o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r employment and o f f e r e d l i t t l e chance 39 of a f u l l e r , more comfortable or economically and s o c i a l l y mobile l i f e . C e r t a i n l y not a l l of Boston's u n s k i l l e d workers can be counted as working poor. There were o p p o r t u n i t i e s w i t h i n the Boston economy f o r the u n s k i l l e d man to l e a r n a trade i n h i s ad u l t l i f e or to gain permanent employment i n a s e r v i c e trade or as p u b l i c l i c e n s e e . Some l a b o r e r s became q u i t e i n d i s p e n s i b l e , i n the manner of the r u r a l handyman, and were t a l e n t e d , v e r s a t i l e and very u s e f u l w h i l e remaining independent day l a b o r e r s and t e c h n i c a l l y \" u n s k i l l e d . \" 4 ^ But very few 258 u n s k i l l e d workers could a t t a i n or preserve a permanent and economically s a t i s f a c t o r y place i n the community as c o n t r a c t l a b o r e r s . I f they d i d not escape the status of c a s u a l , l i m i t e d - t e r m l a b o r e r by moving v o c a t i o n a l l y upward, they r i s k e d permanent b o r d e r l i n e poverty. Furthermore, continuance i n a p o s i t i o n of subsistence l a b o r e r endan-gered the i n d i v i d u a l ' s a b i l i t y to f i n d a f i x e d place i n the com-munity's s o c i a l , economic and even p o l i t i c a l process. The day l a b o r e r had d i f f i c u l t y i n s t a r t i n g a f a m i l y and i f he d i d , ran the r i s k of having i t dismembered; he had no hope of a t t a i n i n g p o l i t i c a l p a r t i c -i p a t i o n i n Boston's c i v i c government. By c o n t r a s t , the a g r i c u l t u r a l l a b o r e r d i d f i n d s o c i a l and economic s e c u r i t y i n h i s s t a t u s , and was assured a permanent d o m i c i l e i n the r u r a l town because h i s v o c a t i o n a l c o n t r i b u t i o n was v i t a l to the a g r i c u l t u r a l economy and because i n v a r -i a b l y he possessed enough ara b l e land to be a l e a s t . p a r t i a l l y s e l f -s u f f i c i e n t . These q u a l i t i e s meant that the r u r a l u n s k i l l e d worker could c l a i m an a c t i v e and respected place i n the community. He was at the centre of a r e l a t i v e l y stable f a m i l y u n i t which i t s e l f was i n v o l v e d i n the v a r i o u s s o c i a l and economic a c t i v i t i e s of the r u r a l town. In those respects the r u r a l l a b o r e r was c l o s e r i n s t a t u s to the r u r a l a r t i s a n than was the Boston l a b o r e r to that of the Boston 4 1 a r t x s a n . From Edward Johnson's time to the end of the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , Boston's economy was supported by a working p o p u l a t i o n com-p r i s e d l a r g e l y of t r a i n e d , independent a r t i s a n s of a great v a r i e t y 259 of s k i l l s and s p e c i a l t i e s . These a r t i s a n s were f i t t e d to the w e l l defined f u n c t i o n s of a commercial, manufacturing and s e r v i c e entrepot. The nature of Boston's economic e n t e r p r i s e s , and the m u l t i p l i c i t y and small s i z e of the u n i t s w i t h i n those e n t e r p r i s e s , precluded the need f o r a l a r g e and s t a b l e f o r c e of u n s k i l l e d workers. What need Boston d i d have f o r u n s k i l l e d l a b o r , on the edges of the p r i v a t e commercial economies and i n p u b l i c works, was f i l l e d to a l a r g e extent by a s o c i o -economic c l a s s that was impermanent; mostly migrant seamen and freed b l a c k s . I t i s worth repeating that t h i s c l a s s was a c r e a t i o n of Boston's r o l e as a commercial, m e r c a n t i l e p o r t . That same economy denied the establishment of a r e s i d e n t and permanent c l a s s of u n s k i l l e d l a b o r e r s and i n v i t e d i t s l a b o r i n g p o p u l a t i o n to be temporary i n substance. There were always u n s k i l l e d workers i n Boston. But there was nothing i n the town's economy to encourage or permit the p e r s i s t e n c e of l a b o r i n g f a m i l i e s , e i t h e r o c c u p a t i o n a l l y or r e s i d e n t i a l l y , so that i f the town's economy d i d r e q u i r e a measure of u n s k i l l e d l a b o r , those i n v o l v e d i n i t were workers who were i n the process of a c q u i r i n g new s k i l l s , or were moving through Boston. U n l i k e the r u r a l towns, Boston had no common means of labor exchange and d i d not accommodate a permanent p o p u l a t i o n of u n s k i l l e d l a b o r . 260 NOTES CHPATER V I I I In a sample of over 200 p r o v i n c i a l work c o n t r a c t s , i n con-s t r u c t i o n , manufacturing and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , taken from MHS Misc. Bd. MSS and M. Arch., V o l s . 59, 244, 245. I found only one example of a p r o j e c t that employed over ten l a b o r e r s f o r more than a few days. D e t a i l s are i n Boston Town Papers, V o l . 4, pp. 200 f f . The work was a combined p r i v a t e - p u b l i c c o n t r a c t f o r r e t a i n i n g w a l l s between the town pond and s e v e r a l adjacent m i l l s . 2BCR, V o l . 17, pp. 161-162. 3BCR, V o l . 14, pp. 220-22, 238-41, 280-2. 4 Lemuel Shattuck, Report of the Census of 1845 (Boston: 1846), pp. 2-132; M. Arch., V o l . 94, \"Muster R o l l s \" ; BCR, V o l s . 7-20, \"Licenses,\" \"poor,\" \"Almshouse.\" The 1790 U.S. Census, excerpted i n BCR, V o l . 10, pp. 171 f f . l i s t s only 157 \" l a b o r e r s \" of a t o t a l working p o p u l a t i o n of 2,585. ^Boston Town Papers, V o l s . 1-7, \"Contracts.\" Appendix I I I ; Boston census i n BCR, V o l . 15, p. 369; MHS Misc. Bd. MSS, \"Census of Negro Slaves i n the Province,\" 1754; Edgar J . McManus, Black Bondage i n the North (Syracuse: 1973), pp. 36-107, 199. Shattuck, Census, p. 132. 7McManus, Black Bondage, pp. 36-107; BCR, V o l s . 11-17, \"Negroes\" i n index. The Town of Boston encouraged b l a c k s to depart f o r other c o l o n i e s , see BCR, V o l . 17, p. 88. On b l a c k s going to sea on Boston-and Massachusetts-based s h i p s , see Lorenzo Greene, The Negro i n C o l o n i a l New England, 1620-1775 (New York: 1945). 8\"V.S. C l a r k Notes,\" Box 1; M. Arch. MSS, V o l s . 60-65, \"Maritimes.\" q M. Arch., V o l . 94, \"Muster R o l l s . \" Elmo Hohman, H i s t o r y of American Merchant Seamen (New York: 1956). 261 1 0 B o s t o n Tom Papers, V o l s . 1-7; BCR, V o l s . 11-20. The former reference concerns p u b l i c works e n t i r e l y ; the l a t t e r shows the mechanisms and o f f i c i a l management of p u b l i c works. \"^Appendix I I I ; W.M. W h i t e h i l l , Boston: A Topographical H i s t o r y (Cambridge: 1968), Chapter 1; MHS, \" P r i c e ' s Boston Maps, 1739 and 1769.\" 12 Compare the Town Budget of 1745, Boston Town Papers, V o l . 4, p. 208 B, w i t h the town's two l a r g e s t shipyards i n 1747, M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 117, pp. 60-68, \" H a l l o w e l l Report.\" 13 A f a c t that was stressed a great deal i n the Town's r e g u l a r p e t i t i o n s to the General Court f o r tax r e l i e f . As a constant employer of otherwise unemployable men, the Town sought a c e r t a i n subsidy f o r i t s p u b l i c works. See BCR, e s p e c i a l l y V o l . 14, pp. 238-40. ^ S h a t t u c k , Census, pp. 64-5; \" P r i c e Maps\"; W h i t e h i l l , Topographical H i s t o r y ; BCR, V o l s . 11-20, passim. 1 5M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 70, \" M i l i t a r y , \" pp. 564-5, 597, 600, 637, 647, p. 120. 1 6 B o s t o n Town Papers, V o l . 2, p. 40; V o l . 3, p. 48; V o l . 5, \"*\" 7Ibid. , V o l s . 2-5 indexes. 18 I b i d . , V o l . 2, pp. 40, 108, 128, 178, 222, 233 are examples of the 10 major s t r e e t c o n t r a c t s issued by the Town i n a normal year. I b i d . 20 Some s t r e e t and highway work gangs were comprised e n t i r e l y or mainly of b l a c k s . For example, see Boston Town Papers, V o l . 2, p. 233; BCR, V o l . 20, p. 218. 21 Stephen E r l a n g e r , \"The C o l o n i a l Worker i n Boston, 1775,\" U.S. Bureau of Labor S t a t i s t i c s , 1976. For the yet unresolved debate on r i s i n g or decreasing poverty among p r o v i n c i a l Boston workers, and on l i v i n g c o n d i t i o n s g e n e r a l l y , see J.A. Henretta, \"Economic Development and S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e i n C o l o n i a l Boston,\" WMQ 22 (1965), pp. 75-92, and G.B. Warden, \"The D i s t r i b u t i o n of Property i n Boston, 1692-1775,\" 262 P e r s p e c t i v e s i n A m e r i c a n H i s t o r y 10 ( 1 9 7 6 ) , p p . 8 1 - 1 2 8 . H e n r e t t a a r g u e s more p o v e r t y and d i m i n i s h e d e x p e c t a t i o n s by u s i n g t a x a s s e s s -ment d a t a a s a g a u g e ; W a r d e n , u s i n g p r o p e r t y t r a n s a c t i o n d a t a , c l a i m s t h a t t h e m a t e r i a l l i v e s o f a l l w o r k e r s was i m p r o v i n g d u r i n g t h e p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d . 22 I b i d . ; See a l s o W a r d e n , \" I n e q u a l i t y and I n s t a b i l i t y i n E i g h t e e n t h C e n t u r y B o s t o n : A R e a p p r a i s a l , \" J I H 6 ( 1 9 7 6 ) , p p . 5 8 5 - 6 2 0 . On wage r a t e s s e e \"Wages i n t h e C o l o n i a l P e r i o d \" ( U . S . B u l l e t i n 4 9 9 , 1929) and C h a p t e r I X , n o t e 1 0 , i n t h e p r e s e n t p a p e r . 23 I b i d . ; C a r l B r i d e n b a u g h , \" T h e H i g h C o s t o f L i v i n g i n B o s t o n , 1 7 2 8 , \" NEQ 5 ( 1 9 3 2 ) , p p . 8 0 0 - 1 1 ; J . T . M a i n , The S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e o f R e v o l u t i o n a r y A m e r i c a ( P r i n c e t o n : 1 9 6 5 ) , p p . 6 8 - 1 6 3 . 24 B o s t o n Town P a p e r s , V o l . 4 , p p . 139 -144 g i v e s examp les o f t h e s e p r a c t i c e s . F o r v o l u n t a r y i n d e n t u r i n g t o r e t i r e s m a l l d e b t s , see MHS M i s c . B d . MSS ( 1 7 3 7 , 1 7 3 8 , 1 7 5 9 ) . 25 B o s t o n Town P a p e r s , on p o r t e r s and s h o r e m e n , V o l . 3 , p . 2 2 9 ; V o l . 4 , p . 1 4 0 ; B C R , V o l s . 1 2 - 1 3 . On a r t i s a n ' s h e l p e r s , s e e MHS M S S , \" J o h n M a r s h a l l D i a r y \" ; B a k e r , M S S , \" J a m e s R u s s e l l R e c e i p t s , \" \" P e a r s o n A c c o u n t s . \" On t h e f a t e s o f many o f B o s t o n ' s w o r k i n g p o o r , s e e D o u g l a s J o n e s , \" T h e S t r o l l i n g P o o r : T r a n s i e n c y i n E i g h t e e n t h C e n t u r y M a s s a c h u s e t t s , \" J S H 8 ( 1 9 7 5 ) , p p . 2 8 - 5 4 . 2 6 B o s t o n Town P a p e r s , V o l . 3 c o n t a i n s many examp les o f f u l l -t i m e p u b l i c employments i n c l u d i n g e x h a u s t i v e d e t a i l o f g r a v e d i g g i n g ( p . 56) and s c a v e n g e r s ( V o l . 4 , p . 2 8 0 ) . On p o r t e r s , s c a v e n g e r s , g r a v e d i g g e r s , m e s s e n g e r s and p u b l i c c a r t e r s , s e e B C R , V o l s . 7 - 2 0 , i n d e x e s . 27 Much o f t h i s f u n d i n g and . h e l p was g i v e n i n hope o f r e d u c i n g t h e p o o r t a x . On p u b l i c l i c e n s e s f o r p r i v a t e e n t e r p r i s e , s e e BCR, V o l s . 11 -17 e s p e c i a l l y , u n d e r \" l i c e n s e s , \" \" t a v e r n e r s , \" \" t r u c k e r s , \" \" i n h o l d e r s , \" e t c . Oh p e t i t i o n s by w i d o w s , h a n d i c a p p e d and aged s e e B o s t o n Town P a p e r s , V o l . 4 , p p . 2 8 0 - 2 8 6 . I n some y e a r s o v e r s e v e n t y -f i v e o f t h e s e l i c e n s e s were i s s u e d , r e n e w e d , c a n c e l l e d o r e x c h a n g e d . See B o s t o n Town P a p e r s , V o l . 2 , p . 9 7 . On m e r c h a n t f i n a n c i a l s u p p o r t f o r p o r t e r s s e e V o l . 4 , p p . 1 4 0 , 1 4 4 . 28 R o b e r t F . S e y b o l t , The Town O f f i c i a l s o f C o l o n i a l B o s t o n , 1 6 2 0 - 1 7 7 5 ( C a m b r i d g e : 1939) c o n t a i n s t h e names o f a l l known c i v i c a d m i n -i s t r a t o r s , a p p o i n t e e s and town e m p l o y e e s d u r i n g B o s t o n ' s p r e - R e v o l u t i o n a r y 263 h i s t o r y . They were ex t r a c t e d from BCR and Boston Town Papers. For se l e c t e d years between 1700 and 1760, names were taken from Seybolt's l i s t s and compared w i t h the g e n e a l o g i c a l , economic and oc c u p a t i o n a l d e t a i l s found i n MHS \"Thwing Catalogue.\" On a p p l i c a t i o n by l a b o r e r s f o r c i v i c employment, see Boston Town Papers, V o l . 3, p. 56. On p e t i t i o n s from Town watch f o r pay increases see V o l . 3, p. 64. For s u b s t i t u t i o n i n c i v i c appointments, see Seybolt, Town O f f i c i a l s . For merchant support of l a b o r e r ' s a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r l i c e n s e s and employment, i n c l u d i n g d e p o s i t i o n s and bonds, see Boston Town Papers, V o l . 4, pp. 132-203. 29 Warden, \" D i s t r i b u t i o n of Pr o p e r t y . \" 30 For c o l l e c t i v e , p r i v a t e e f f o r t s to f i n d f u l l - t i m e employment or advance c r a f t s t r a i n i n g f o r the u n s k i l l e d working poor, see BCR, V o l . 8, pp. 147-8, 154; V o l . 13, p. 80. And the records of The So c i e t y f o r encouraging Industry and Employing the Poor i n MHS, \" E z e k i a l P r i c e Papers,\" Sheets 141-322. A l s o , see \" A r t i c l e s of the S o c i e t y \" and the sermons of Charles Chauncy, Thomas Barnard and Samuel Cooper, a l l at MHS (and i n Evans Catalogue, 1750-56). 31 C o l o n i a l Laws, pp. 26, 103, 123, 126-8; Acts and Resolves, V o l . 1, pp. 64-68, V o l . 2, pp. 756-8. 32 On the Almshouse, see BCR, V o l . 7, p. 186, V o l . 13, pp. 194, 294-6, V o l . 15, pp. 20-1, 75-6, 292, V o l . 17, pp. 86-9, 232-3, 148. And passim, V o l s , 11-20. On the Workhouse ( b u i l t i n 1738), see BCR, V o l . 15, pp. 27, 30, 38, 66, 189. On the populations of these i n s t i t u t i o n s , see BCR, V o l . 15, p. 369. On p r i s o n f i g u r e s and reasons f o r i n c a r c e r -a t i o n s , see MHS Misc. Bd. 'MSS, f o r 1734, 1740, 1742, 1752. 33 G.B. Warden, Boston, 1689-1775 (Boston: 1970), Chapter 2; BCR, V o l . 14, pp. 238-41, 280-2; M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 59, pp. 60-8. 34 The a u t h o r i t y f o r residency requirements and f o r c o n t r o l of migrants was given to towns. See J o s i a h Benton, Warning Out i n New England, 1656-1817 (Boston: 1911). In some years the Town of Boston \"warned out\" an average of n e a r l y f o r t y persons a month, see Boston Town Papers, V o l . 7, p. 73. 35 Lawrence Towner, \"The Indentures of Boston's Poor A p p r e n t i c e s , 1734-1805,\" C o l o n i a l Society of Massachusetts, Transactions 43 (1956), pp. 417-68. 264 3 6 I b i d . ; Acts and Resolves, V o l . I , pp. 64-8, V o l . I I , pp. 756-8 ( e s p e c i a l l y s e c t i o n 7) give ample ex p l a n a t i o n and j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r the o f f i c i a l encouragement of e a r l y indenture of the c h i l d r e n of the poor. 3 7BCR, V o l . 15, p. 369; D a n i e l Scott Smith, \"The Demographic H i s t o r y of C o l o n i a l New England,\" JEH 32 (1972), pp. 165-83. On \" l o s t \" seamen, see Boston Town Papers, V o l . 4, p. 135. 3 8 ' W.R. B a g n a l l , The T e x t i l e I n d u s t r i e s of the United States (Cambridge: 1893), pp. 28-62. 39 I b i d . On the issuance of commercial l i c e n c e s to widows, see Boston Town Papers, V o l . 4, p. 135. There are s e v e r a l dozen good examples of p e t i t i o n s , appeals and d e c i s i o n s on the l i c e n s i n g of widows i n BCR, V o l s . 7-20, indexes; \"widows,\" \" f e e s , \" \" l i c e n c e s . \" 4 0 B a k e r MSS, \"Cockerel Reeves Account Book, 1708-1729.\" 4 x 0 n v o t i n g q u a l i f i c a t i o n and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Town Meetings, i n Boston and i n the r u r a l towns, see E l l i s Ames (no t i t l e ) , MHS Proceedings 10 (1868), pp. 370-75; Ala n K r e i d e r and Kenneth Loc k r i d g e , \"The E v o l u t i o n of Massachusetts Town Government, 1640-1740,\" WMQ 23 (1966), pp. 549-74. The Town Meeting was o s t e n s i b l y a democratic forum where e l i g i b l e f r e e h o l d e r s \"voted\" on l o c a l i s s u e s and ordinances, i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h the el e c t e d selectmen. However, r e l a t i v e town s i z e could determine the degree of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s process — even among e l i g i b l e r e s i d e n t s . For example, as many as 1,500 men i n Boston were f r a n c h i s e d i n the eighteenth century, but the Meeting House had a 250 -300 person c a p a c i t y . By c o n t r a s t , 100 men o f t e n attended B r a i n -t r e e Town Meetings i n the 1700-1710 p e r i o d ; at that time B r a i n t r e e had fewer than 300 \" r a t e a b l e p o l l s , \" see MHS MSS, \"John M a r s h a l l D i a r y . \" This i n t e r e s t i n g aspect of l o c a l p o l i t i c s has hot been emphasized enough i n the p e r t i n e n t work of such h i s t o r i a n s as K r e i d e r and Lock r i d g e , Richard and Katherine Brown, and Michael Zuckerman. (See Bi b l i o g r a p h y ) CHAPTER IX CONCLUSION GROWTH AND STABILITY IN PROVINCIAL MASACHUSETTS: THE CASE OF LABOR So f a r , two d i s t i n c t economic s e t t i n g s f o r l a b o r have been observed as e x i s t i n g i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts. One of these was the a g r a r i a n town and the other the commercial economy of Boston. The arrangements and p r a c t i c e s of labor w i t h i n those s e t t i n g s have been seen as d i r e c t r e f l e c t i o n s of the two economies. The d e s c r i p t i o n s have concluded that the community, e i t h e r the r u r a l town, or the commercial centre as represented by Boston, was a major i n f l u e n c e i n how work was performed, the formal and i n f o r m a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of labo r and where l a b o r was employed; the q u a l i t y of l i f e i n the community a l s o was i n f l u e n c e d by the ends or attainments sought i n work. The p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , roughly that span of time between 1690 and 1765, has been t r e a t e d as a whole, f o r the purpose of examining the broader o u t l i n e s of l a b o r i n the broadest p o s s i b l e scope of time. Rather than adopt a l i n e a r , p r o g r e s s i v e approach, t h i s study made comparative examinations of labor at e i t h e r end of the period and at p o i n t s i n between. The important c o n c l u s i o n of t h i s examin-a t i o n i s that the fundamental q u a l i t i e s of l o c a l economic c o n d i t i o n s d i d not change and the ways i n which work was organized and accomplished remained constant throughout the p e r i o d . Three successive generations shared the same r e s p e c t i v e economic mode, la b o r technology and communal s e t t i n g f o r t h e i r l a b o r s ; the means, 265 behavior and expectations of workers i n 1690 were remarkably s i m i l a r to those of 1765. The r u r a l shoemaker of the 1760s s t i l l worked at a bench i n a shop adjacent to h i s farmhouse f o r s i m i l a r income l e v e l s and s o c i a l e x p e c t a t i o n s , as h i s t p r e d e c e s s o r had done three generations earlier.\"'\" Ship b u i l d e r s i n Boston s t i l l subcontracted f o r p o r t i o n s of p r o j e c t s i n 1765, i n much the same manner as t h e i r business antecedents 2 had done. Labor p r a c t i c e s and r e l a t i o n s i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts were presented as an unbroken continuum because no important r e s t r u c t u r i n g or change was detected. Nevertheless, even i n \" p r o v i n c i a l , \" p a r o c h i a l and i n s u l a r Massachusetts, important and sometimes novel events d i d occur and f o r the workers and r e s i d e n t s of t h i s s e t t l e d world, broader i s s u e s appeared to t e s t the d u r a b i l i t y of the ordered p a t t e r n s and i n s t i t u t i o n s of t h e i r s o c i a l and working l i v e s . Most of the great events of the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , those unusual or unexpected or major i n t e r r u p t i o n s of a f f a i r s , were d i s r u p t i v e r a t h e r than d e s t r u c t i v e and the r e s i l i e n c e of Massachusetts s o c i e t y helped the community to absorb the p o t e n t i a l d i s -order that major s o c i a l i n s t r u s i o n s can i g n i t e . War and disease were r e g u l a r and even a n t i c i p a t e d disturbances of normal l i f e . The province was under a near constant t h r e a t from e i t h e r h o s t i l e I ndian t r i b e s or from the French or from a combination of a l l i e d French and Indian i n -c u r s i o n s . L o c a l and Im p e r i a l m i l i t a r y c o n f l i c t peaked f r e q u e n t l y i n the periods from the mid-1690s to about 1713, and from 1739 to the l a t e 1740s and again during the 1754 to 1763 era. These v a r i o u s s t a t e s of 267 warfare were each of them capable of d i s l o c a t i n g l i f e i n Massachusetts; the province was a c t i v e l y involved i n t e r r i t o r i a l defense and troop supply f o r these a c t u a l or pr o s p e c t i v e h o s t i l i t i e s . But a long-e s t a b l i s h e d program of u n i v e r s a l m i l i t i a t r a i n i n g and preparedness, at the l o c a l community l e v e l , and a p r a c t i c e of securing the f r o n t i e r of settlement w i t h pre-emptive aggression, s t a b i l i z e d and p a r t l y n e u t r a l i z e d the e f f e c t s of war and the p o s s i b l e impediments to c o n t r o l l e d expansion 3 and secure settlement. Disease was as endemic to p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y as was the thr e a t of war. Indeed, the presence or e r u p t i o n of disease i n the p r o v i n c i a l community was an accepted s o c i a l hardship. But there were a l s o epidemics of such s c a l e that major economic, s o c i a l and demographic consequences were p o s s i b l e . In Boston, three massive and stubborn smallpox outbreaks i n 1721, 1730 and 1752 each i n f e c t e d h a l f of the r e s i d e n t s and were f a t a l to between 5% and 8% of the town's p o p u l a t i o n . Each smallpox epidemic caused s e r i o u s s o c i a l and economic i n t e r r u p t i o n , i n c l u d i n g mass f l i g h t s of panic and the suspension of normal business and l a b o r a f f a i r s . But Boston recovered each time; f l i g h t was temporary and a l l other a c t i v i t i e s 4 resumed t h e i r long-term patterns and trends. In r u r a l Massachusetts, c r e g i o n a l i z e d and o c c a s i o n a l l y widespread epidemics of i n f e c t i o u s and l e t h a l \" t h r o a t distempers,\" dysentry and d i p h t h e r i a occurred i n 1711, 1735, 1745 and 1756 no t a b l y , and r e s u l t e d i n a doubling of m o r t a l i t y r a t e s i n some towns and regions. But again, as i n the case of Boston, the r u r a l communities resumed t h e i r a f f a i r s i n the aftermaths of these d i s o r d e r s , without any l i n g e r i n g changes i n l o c a l conditions.\"^ C e r t a i n l y i n d i v i d u a l s and f a m i l i e s were permanently a f f e c t e d by war and disease and there can be no c o l d d i s m i s s a l of the long-term e f f e c t s of s u f f e r i n g , l o s s and d e p r i v a t i o n caused by these c a l a m i t i e s . But l i f e i n the communities continued, and f o r the v a s t m a j o r i t y of the p o p u l a t i o n no s o c i a l or economic r e s t r u c t u r i n g r e s u l t e d from these a b e r r a t i o n s . These wars and disease c r i s e s d i d not i n and of themselves change the face or substance of communal s o c i e t y . In f a c t no event, nor s e r i e s of events, of these kinds s e r i o u s l y a f f e c t e d the o r d e r l y f l o w of l i f e . The changes that d i d occur i n eighteenth century s o c i e t y , would be more gradual or e v o l u t i o n a r y and would owe t h e i r s t r e n g t h and e f f e c t i v e n e s s to a necessary q u a l i t y of wide and deep pervasiveness. So f a r as the worker i n s o c i e t y was concerned, war and disease d i d not permanently i n t r u d e upon h i s p r a c t i c e s , purposes or s t a t u s . However, i n a more d i r e c t l y s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l way, changes i n r e l i g i o u s behavior and a f f i l i a t i o n , both slow and sudden, were p o t e n t i a l l y more v i t a l and d i s -t u r b i n g . A d e c l i n e i n congregational a u t h o r i t y or a r i s e i n s e c t a r i a n -ism, non-conformity or even the appearance or development of l a t i t u d i n -a r i a n trends had an impact on the s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n and balance w i t h i n many communities. The Great Awakening and the i n c r e a s e i n non-Congregationalism caused or r e f l e c t e d c e r t a i n processes of p o l i t i c a l change.^ The c e n t r a l place of the Church i n the s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l l i v e s of p r o v i n c i a l men and women cannot be understated; nor can the 269 f a c t of r e l i g i o u s change i n the eighteenth century be denied. As s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l arrangements were subject to a r e o r d e r i n g , i n l i g h t of r e l i g i o u s e v o l u t i o n and change, i t was p o s s i b l e that economic and working r e l a t i o n s h i p s , h a b i t s and c o n d i t i o n s s i m i l a r l y could be rearranged. As the economic s e t t i n g of work was derived from a set of e c c l e s i a s t i c a l , p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l p r i n c i p l e s and s t r u c t u r e s , any s u b s t a n t i a l change i n the l a t t e r should change some feat u r e s of the economic a c t i v i t i e s of workers. Yet there i s no evidence that such a r e a c t i o n occurred. I t appears that when and wherever new r e l i g i o u s and p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e s developed i n towns or r e g i o n a l l y across the p r o v i n c e , the r u l e s and p r a c t i c e s of work and e s t a b l i s h e d l a b o r p a t t e r n s remained u n a l t e r e d . 7 Workers, of whatever type or s t a t u s , continued to operate i n the f a m i l i a r c o n d i t i o n s of t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e environments. E c c l e s i a s t i c a l and l o c a l p o l i t i c a l change or adjustment c e r t a i n l y may have a f f e c t e d p r o t o c o l and l e a d e r s h i p , but i t d i d not s e r i o u s l y a f f e c t the ways and means, purposes and rewards of l a b o r . A more d i r e c t source of economic i n t e r f e r e n c e — monetary and currency f l u c t u a t i o n — d i d plague the province r e g u l a r l y and p e r s i s t e n t l y and o f t e n r e s u l t e d i n or c o i n c i d e d w i t h general or s e l e c t i v e economic t r i b u l a t i o n . Indeed, some of the events a s s o c i a t e d w i t h f i n a n c i a l change caused n e a r - c r i s i s c o n d i t i o n s by c r e a t i n g w i d e l y swinging monetary values and currency shortages and excess emissions g of paper money. In the 1740s, f o r example, i n the wake of concerted f i n a n c i a l s p e c u l a t i o n by i n v e s t o r s i n . a massive land bank scheme that 270 was supported by Government emission of huge sums of paper currency, a n e a r l y 800% annual i n f l a t i o n r a t e g r e a t l y devalued the Massachusetts currency and there was consi d e r a b l e confusion i n the f i n a n c i a l t r a n s -9 a c t i o n s of a l l r e s i d e n t s , at a l l l e v e l s of economic l i f e . But c o r r e c t i o n s were made very q u i c k l y and smoothly at the l o c a l l e v e l when commodity and labor values were d i s t o r t e d by e i t h e r gradual or r a p i d currency debasement and i r r e g u l a r i t y . The r u r a l worker knew immediately, through l o c a l o f f i c i a l p u b l i c i t y , what the reformed value of h i s l a b o r was i n r e l a t i o n to the goods and s e r v i c e s i t normally brought, no matter how much the l a t t e r were revalued by currency and other f i n a n c i a l f l u c t u a t i o n . The short-and longer-term e f f e c t s of changing monetary v a l u e s , and other p r o v i n c i a l f i n a n c i a l u n c e r t a i n t i e s and r e c o n s t r u c t i o n s , d i d not p e r c e p t i b l y reshape the economic c o n f i g u r a t i o n s and p r a c t i c e s of the near autonomous and l a r g e l y cash-free economies of the a g r a r i a n communities. Even i n Boston, and i n other commercial economies, where the a v a i l a b i l i t y and value of c a p i t a l , c r e d i t , currency and b i l l s of exchange were c r u c i a l to the i n t e r n a t i o n a l and i n t e r - c o l o n i a l component of the economy, no great a l t e r a t i o n of working l i f e and no measurable reassessment of labor value could be observed. Over the f i r s t s i x decades of the eighteenth century, the most s i g n i f i c a n t change i n the r e l a t i o n of a r t i s a n ' s wage values to commodity values was a s l i g h t i ncrease i n favor of wage r a t e s when compared to the quoted value of the c e n t r a l commodity, wheat. 271 The domestic consequences of Im p e r i a l economic p o l i c y and c o n t r o l s , p r i o r to the 1763-1765 p e r i o d , though they o b v i o u s l y exerted an i n f l u e n c e on the p o s i t i o n s and a t t i t u d e s of most merchants, d i d not transform or i n t e r r u p t the working c o n d i t i o n s and p r a c t i c e s of the m a j o r i t y of Boston's a r t i s a n s and middle c l a s s e n t r e p r e n e u r s . X X A l l the foregoing events, c r i s e s , i n t e r r u p t i o n s and p o t e n t i a l l y transforming f o r c e s and trends c o n s t i t u t e d , i n whole or i n p a r t , a process that might suggest change i n the l a r g e r s t r u c t u r e of Massachusetts s o c i e t y . From the per s p e c t i v e of post-Revolutionary America, i t i s perhaps p o s s i b l e to construct a coherent h i s t o r y of e v o l u t i o n a r y change i n p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y . But even i f the p e r s i s t e n c e of di s e a s e , war, r e l i g i o u s and p o l i t i c a l rearrangement, and economic and f i n a n c i a l i r r e g u l a r i t i e s can be seen as c o n t r i b u t i n g to a p l a u s i b l e e v o l u t i o n and change i n the t o t a l s t r u c t u r e of p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts, i t does not f o l l o w that each component aspect of that s t r u c t u r e should be 12 s i m i l a r l y i nvolved i n the process of change. I t can be argued that l a b o r was l a r g e l y exempted from those e f f e c t s . From the viewpoint of the 1760s, not much had changed i n the circumstances and a c t i v i t i e s of workers i n the province. In f a c t , the advance of time and the m i l i t a r y , monetary, r e l i g i o u s and p o l i t i c a l events and processes may indeed have been changing the world around the p r o v i n c i a l worker. But h i s working l i f e , and the immediate c u l t u r a l , s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l and m a t e r i a l aspects of h i s p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n remained much as they had been f o r h i s grandfather. So i t was f o r the m a j o r i t y of workers and working f a m i l i e s i n p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y . 272 Perhaps the most s i g n i f i c a n t change i n the outward appearance of p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts was the near quadrupling of p o p u l a t i o n between 1690 and 1760. R u r a l growth d i d e f f e c t change i n c e r t a i n towns wh i l e i t simply enlarged most; and the e f f e c t s of p o p u l a t i o n growth on some towns was perhaps the greatest observable cause of a marginal r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of c o n d i t i o n s among a m i n o r i t y of workers. At one very important l e v e l , however, pop u l a t i o n increase d i d not change the substance of working l i f e , i n the community or f o r the i n d i v i d u a l ; i t merely expanded the s c a l e and reach of e x i s t i n g i n s t i t u t i o n s and f a c i l i t i e s and included ever l a r g e r numbers of workers i n t r a d i t i o n a l c o n d i t i o n s . Despite the more than doubling of the number of Massachusetts towns between 1700 and 1765 (84 to 192), the average populations of towns nevertheless grew from some 700 to s l i g h t l y more than 1,100 during the same p e r i o d . But t h i s growth was f o r the most p a r t , and i n the great m a j o r i t y of towns, absorbed i n t o e x i s t i n g and ongoing i n s t i t u t i o n s ; and t r a d i t i o n a l methods of work and o p p o r t u n i t i e s 13 f o r land continued. Therefore, a l a r g e p r o p o r t i o n of the new population was a s s i m i l a t e d by the e s t a b l i s h e d socio-economic system of subsistence farming and a l t e r n a t i v e v o c a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e . There was s t i l l room f o r expansion of t h i s system i n the l a t e r p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d . But w h i l e t h i s p a t t e r n held true f o r most towns and f o r most workers and t h e i r successors i n the province, i t d i d not apply to a l l . Some towns i n eastern Massachusetts d i d grow to a point where normal land h o l d i n g r a t i o s and v o c a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s were jeopardised and where dual farming and l a b o r i n g ceased f o r an increased percentage of r e s i d e n t s . The p r i n c i p a l l o c a t i o n s f o r these developments were among the t r a d i t i o n a l l y l a r g e towns of eastern Essex county and i n some of the l a r g e r towns w i t h i n the c l o s e r a d i u s of Boston. In communities such as Salem, Newbury, Newburyport, Ipswich and Andover i n Essex, and i n Cambridge, Charlestown, B r a i n t r e e , Hingham and Weymouth, near Boston, and i n other l a r g e r towns i n B r i s t o l and Plymouth c o u n t i e s , c h i e f l y Bridgewater, Middleborough, Taunton, Rehoboth and Dartmouth, subsistence 14 farming d e c l i n e d as a major b a s i s f o r work. The immediate causes of these s h i f t s i n work patterns were derived from s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d p o p u l a t i o n growth. In towns such as Ipswich and Newbury, a f i x e d and much p a r c e l l e d land area and high po p u l a t i o n d e n s i t y d a t i n g from the seventeenth century and an un f l a g g i n g b i r t h r a t e had g r a d u a l l y reduced the amount of land a v a i l a b l e to numbers of succeeding h e i r s . The percentage of land h o l d i n g workers dropped i n these communities as populations rose and a v a i l a b l e land per c a p i t a d e c l i n e d on a f i n i t e land base. X^ This trend was exacerbated by imm o b i l i t y among second and t h i r d generation eighteenth century males. Many of these young men were content to remain i n the towns of t h e i r b i r t h s and work as l a n d l e s s l a b o r e r s and d r i f t i n t o the growing commercial economies of t h e i r own or nearby towns, r a t h e r than migrate to newer towns and o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r land elsewhere i n western Massachusetts and New Hampshire. 1^ 274 The same pressure of p o p u l a t i o n and the d e l i b e r a t e and v o l u n -t a r y i m m o b i l i t y of young l a n d l e s s men r e s u l t e d i n s i m i l a r m o d i f i c a t i o n s i n the province's e s t a b l i s h e d t w o - l e v e l or intermediate economies. Salem and Newburyport perhaps were the outstanding examples of the seventeenth century mixed economy, where the p o p u l a t i o n had d i v i d e d i t s e l f i n t o two d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e s e c t o r s of separate a g r i c u l t u r a l and commercial economic and occupational functions.\"'\" 7 By the end of the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , Salem's popu l a t i o n was n e a r l y 6,000 and i t was the second l a r g e s t town i n the province. While p r e v i o u s l y about 60% of Salem's i n h a b i t a n t s had occupied farms, the number had f a l l e n to 18 n e a r l y 40% i n the 1760s. Commercial and manufacturing a c t i v i t y had increased p r o p o r t i o n a l l y . As Boston's economy and p o p u l a t i o n l e v e l l e d out a f t e r 1740, much of the n a t u r a l growth and expansion i n Massachusetts s h i p b u i l d i n g , d i s t i l l i n g , l e a t h e r production, wood products manufacturing, coopering, warehousing and shipping devolved to communities such as Salem. New-buryport, B r a i n t r e e and some e r s t w h i l e predominantly a g r i c u l t u r a l 19 c o a s t a l towns. The s p e c i a l i z e d a r t i s a n s , s k i l l e d and s e m i - s k i l l e d workers, normally the marked f e a t u r e of the Boston labor economy, were becoming e s t a b l i s h e d i n i n c r e a s i n g numbers and as a growing p r o p o r t i o n of a l l workers, i n towns where a g r i c u l t u r e was receding as a p r i n c i p a l 20 l a b o r mode. In s h o r t , the growth i n the province's commercial, non-a g r i c u l t u r a l economy, that growth which occurred along w i t h general p o p u l a t i o n i n c r e a s e , was being d e c e n t r a l i z e d away from i t s p r i o r 275 co n c e n t r a t i o n i n Boston. And as i t was, i t was supported by a growing number of n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l workers, and a high percentage of them, i n the r e l a t i v e l y crowded p r e c i n c t s of o l d e r and l a r g e r eastern c o a s t a l •«-• 2 1 communities. These economic and v o c a t i o n a l developments were l i m i t e d , how-ever, to a dozen or so towns on or c l o s e to the Massachusetts seaboard. The province's commercial f i s h i n g towns, p r i n c i p a l l y Gloucester and Marblehead — whose populations reached 3,000 each by 1770 — and Plymouth, where together some 1,200 f a m i l i e s gained t h e i r l i v e l i h o o d s from f i s h i n g or a mixture of f i s h i n g and farming, were unaffected by pop u l a t i o n growth and commercial economic d i f f u s i o n because the stocks 22 of f i s h , and the markets f o r them permitted o r d e r l y expansion. C e r t a i n l y the populations of most f i s h i n g communities increased, but there, j u s t as i n the i n l a n d farm communities, work patte r n s continued untrammelled and means of l i v e l i h o o d and customs were passed on to others i n a s e t t i n g that could accommodate them. The e f f e c t s of growth and the r e d i s t r i b u t i o n of commercial economic e n t e r p r i s e were s l i g h t and g e o g r a p h i c a l l y s e l e c t i v e . For most of Massachusetts and f o r v i r t u a l l y a l l of i t beyond the l i t t o r a l , the t r a d i t i o n a l means and methods of work and the economic context of community endured. Men s t i l l worked i n the same ways f o r f a m i l i a r ends. The conventional terms and o b j e c t i v e s of work i n 1690 were a v a i l a b l e and a t t a i n a b l e , under s i m i l a r c o n d i t i o n s , i n 1760. There had been no i n d u s t r i a l or a g r i c u l t u r a l i n n o v a t i o n i n mechanical or t e c h n o l o g i c a l devices or i n o r g a n i z a t i o n a l technique or p r a c t i c e . 276 In i t s e l f , t h i s r e l a t i v e s t a s i s i n economic and v o c a t i o n a l methods assured a c e r t a i n c o n t i n u i t y f o r l a b o r . But the c h i e f agency of s t a b i l i t y and c o n t i n u i t y was the l o c a l community. There, the i n s t i t u t i o n s of home, farm, f a m i l y and labor exchange, and the commun-i t y ' s c a p a c i t y to provide some land f o r most, and the p l a s t i c i t y of i t s economy, meant that i t could i n c o r p o r a t e steady and s u b s t a n t i a l growth over three generations without being transformed i n the process. Indeed, i t was i n the t r a d i t i o n a l l y f l u i d - l a b o r economies of the r u r a l a g r i c u l t u r a l towns that most of the p o p u l a t i o n growth i n Massachusetts took p l a c e , so that i n the area of l e a s t change there occurred the greatest percentage of growth. For example, the regions of Worcester and Hampshire counties i n the west, and York county i n the n o r t h accounted f o r 25.4% of the province's p o p u l a t i o n i n 1751; between 1751 and 1765 these wholly a g r i c u l t u r a l areas absorbed 45.36% of the p o p u l a t i o n growth i n Massachusetts — 23,509 of 51,819 — to increase t h e i r share to n e a r l y 30% of the t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n . In her study of i n s t i t u t i o n a l i n f l u e n c e L o i s Mathews found that most of the growth i n l a t e p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y took place i n a g r i c u l t u r a l communities and concluded that Massachusetts was more a g r i c u l t u r a l i n 23 1775 than i t had been at the beginning of the eighteenth century. In f a c t , the amount of c u l t i v a t e d acreage continued to i n -crease a f t e r the p r o v i n c i a l p eriod and rose from 580,200 acres i n 1751 to 1,265,000 acres i n 1801. The p o p u l a t i o n of Massachusetts more than doubled i n t h i s same h a l f - c e n t u r y : from 192,000 to 422,000. 277 The a c r e s p e r c a p i t a o f c u l t i v a t e d l a n d was n e a r l y c o n s t a n t — a t 3 . 0 2 i n 1751 and 3 . 0 0 i n 1 8 0 1 . C e r t a i n l y t h i s a g r i c u l t u r a l c o n s i s t e n c y , on a f i n i t e t e r r i t o r i a l b a s e , was a i d e d by b e t t e r l a n d - u s e t e c h n i q u e s , t h e b r e a k i n g and r e c l a m a t i o n o f p r e v i o u s l y i g n o r e d w a s t e l a n d , and by m e c h a n i c a l i n n o v a t i o n . Bu t as P e r c y B i d w e l l p o i n t s o u t , most o f t h e s e \" a d v a n c e s \" o c c u r r e d a f t e r t h e R e v o l u t i o n when t h e need f o r a more i n t e n s i v e u s e o f l a n d f o r c e d M a s s a c h u s e t t s f a r m e r s f i n a l l y t o adop t a g r i c u l t u r a l t e c h n i q u e s t h e y had i g n o r e d up t o t h e 1 7 7 0 s . I n d e e d , a c c o r d i n g t o B i d w e l l , as l a t e as t h e 1780s f a r m s and f a r m i n g had n o t changed s i g n i f i c a n t l y s i n c e t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e c e n t u r y , even i n t h e o l d e r , s e t t l e d r e g i o n s . T h e r e was s t i l l no i n c e n t i v e f o r i n t e n s i v e \" p r o d u c t i v i t y \" f o r p r o f i t ; a p r o c e s s t h a t w o u l d have s p u r r e d more advanced l a n d - u s e and imp lemen t t e c h n i q u e s . M o r e o v e r , ' i t h a s b e e n s u g g e s t e d i n t h i s p r e s e n t s t u d y t h a t t r a d i t i o n a l ways o f f a r m i n g , f o r a c o n s t a n t p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n , were c o n t i n u e d i n t h e p r o v i n c e b e c a u s e s u b s i s t e n c e f a m i l y f a r m i n g and e s t a b l i s h e d methods o f p r o d u c -t i v i t y s u i t e d t h e economic and l a b o r p u r p o s e s o f r u r a l s o c i e t y . P r i o r t o t h e R e v o l u t i o n t h e r a t e o f p o p u l a t i o n i n c r e a s e , w h i l e p e r s i s t e n t , had n o t been s u f f i c i e n t t o compe l a more \" s c i e n t i f i c \" u s e o f l a n d and t o o l s i n o r d e r t o s u p p o r t more p e o p l e on l e s s a v a i l a b l e l a n d . A l t h o u g h l a n d was no t so p l e n t i f u l i n e a s t e r n M a s s a c h u s e t t s i n t h e 1760s a s i t had been i n 1690, t h e r e was s t i l l enough a v a i l a b l e t o m a i n t a i n e x t e n s i v e s u b s i s t e n c e f a r m i n g f o r an i m p o r t a n t m a j o r i t y o f t h e r u r a l p o p u l a t i o n . I t s h o u l d be remembered t h a t o f a l l t i t l e d l a n d i n M a s a c h u s e t t s i n 1750 o n l y 40% was u n d e r c u l t i v a t i o n — a mere 11% o f t h e t o t a l l a n d a r e a r . - i . 2 4 o f t h e p r o v i n c e . 278 Nevertheless, some l i m i t i n g f a c t o r s regarding a g r i c u l t u r a l growth, land a v a i l a b i l i t y and r u r a l l a b o r s t a b i l i t y should be repeated. In both o l d e r and newer s e t t l e d regions of the province the a v a i l a b l e \"new\" land base was indeed s h r i n k i n g i n the face of p o p u l a t i o n i n c r e a s e and the demand f o r arable s o i l . By 1760 there were only a few unbroken, ungranted t r a c t s of f e r t i l e land l e f t w i t h i n Massachusetts and these were i n the f a r west and north of the province; and the amount of a v a i l a b l e o l d e r deeded and subdivided land was decreasing. Quite simply, p o p u l a t i o n and farm land were approaching an imbalance. Each generation l a i d c l a i m to i t s expected share of a r a b l e land and f e l t o b l i g e d to amass, hold and then t r a n s f e r land to i t s successors. The a v a i l a b l e land base was f i n i t e and there i s no question that contemporaries were aware and concerned about the l i m i t s to c o n t i n u a l a g r i c u l t u r a l expansion. Schemes to secure t r a c t s of l a n d , i n d i v i d u a l l y or as members of communal groups, i n western Massachusetts, New Hampshire and elsewhere i n New England, had been organized and chartered 25 s i n c e the l a t e seventeenth century. At the end of the p r o v i n c i a l p e riod organized attempts were made by land speculators to l u r e pre-sumed land-short or l a n d l e s s Massachusetts men to Nova S c o t i a ; a p l a n , 26 i n c i d e n t a l l y , that f a i l e d to achieve i t s intended form or s c a l e . In most of Massachusetts, however, i n d i v i d u a l t i t l e d land holdings were decreasing i n s i z e by the l a t e 1760s, as more sons and lessees demanded 27 more pieces of former 100 to 200 acre p r o p e r t i e s . What d e f l e c t e d the pressure on l a n d , or minimized i t s e f f e c t s , was the d u r a b i l i t y of the s c a l e , technology and l a b o r dynamics of subsistence farming. So long as the farm remained a s i n g l e f a m i l y u n i t i t s operable s i z e was f i x e d . The p r a c t i c e of o b t a i n i n g ten to twenty acres of farm land by purchase, le a s e or bequeath, f o r a constant or r i s i n g percentage of the p o p u l a t i o n , 28 continued to the end of the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d . The second po i n t to be made regarding l a b o r s t a b i l i t y i n r u r a l Massachusetts concerns l o c a l s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . These, of course, 29 were t i e d to the o r i g i n a l causes and purposes of subsistence farming. The farm, the f a m i l y and the community survived and remained as s t a b l e and c o n t i n u i n g agencies because they had been designed, molded and up-held to conform to the a v a i l a b i l i t y , use and t r a n s f e r r e n c e of farm land. The l i m i t a t i o n s to commercial farming continued beyond the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , so that subsistence farming remained the dominant a g r i c u l t u r a l mode. C e r t a i n l y there were bounds to the s i z e at which a p a r t i c u l a r community could continue to serve as a s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t market, dependent on a m a j o r i t y of i t s i n h a b i t a n t s r e t a i n i n g a landed i n t e r e s t as sub-s i s t e n c e farmers. But to the end of the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d the average Massachusetts town had not reached that bound or l i m i t . I t remained a non-commercial, l a r g e l y s e l f - c o n t a i n e d l a b o r and economic market, f u l f i l l i n g that r o l e and being nourished by an independent, e t h n i c a l l y homogeneous and economically balanced p o p u l a t i o n which exchanged i t s labor on an interdependent but h i g h l y p e r s o n a l i z e d b a s i s . The Meeting House, as a symbol of c u l t u r a l and communal cohesion, w i t h i t s o f f i c e s of r e l i g i o u s and p o l i t i c a l management and c o n t r o l , stood as the o f f i c i a l 280 fulcrum of s o c i a l l i f e i n the community. But i t was work, r a t h e r than the e c c l e s i a s t i c a l p o l i t y , that committed the i n d i v i d u a l a d u l t male to the community and i t s c o l l e c t i v e i n t e r e s t . In these pages workers o f t e n have been considered en masse, as c o l l e c t i v e and even d e f i n a b l e groups of a r t i s a n s , farmers, l a b o r e r s and entrepreneurs. Nevertheless, an attempt has been made to d e p i c t and emphasize the independence and uniqueness i m p l i c i t i n the h a b i t s of men who were m u l t i - t a l e n t e d , s e l f - r e l i a n t and v o c a t i o n a l l y mobile i n t h e i r working l i v e s . Although much evidence was drawn from impersonal sources, these men should not be regarded e n t i r e l y as s t a t i s t i c s . They were i n d i v i d u a l s , and the evidence of t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s , 30 c o n d i t i o n s and goals was drawn i n l a r g e part from t h e i r own records. The worker i n p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y was a p e r s o n a l i t y . But there was an apparent paradox i n h i s s i t u a t i o n . C e r t a i n l y he was a member of a c u l t u r e and h a b i t a t that demanded r e l i g i o u s and p o l i t i c a l conformity and s t r i c t s o c i a l a c c o u n t a b i l i t y to the community. Yet he possessed the means to express himself as a f r e e i n d i v i d u a l , i n the context of h i s f a m i l y and work. As such the p r o v i n c i a l man d i s p l a y e d a character that i s at odds w i t h the stereotyped s o l i t a r y , brooding and p e s s i m i s t i c 31 New Englander. Rather, he was hopeful and c o o p e r a t i v e , l i k e Cockerel Reeves, and enjoyed h i s work, took p r i d e i n i t , shared and exchanged i t w i t h others as d i d John Reed, the shoemaker, and demonstrated a personal r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , c r e a t i v i t y and r e s o u r c e f u l n e s s l i k e those q u a l i t i e s of John M a r s h a l l , the mason, that i n d i c a t e s both a l i b e r a l 281 c o n v i v i a l i t y and a strong i n d i v i d u a l character. He was as outgoing i n h i s working l i f e as he was d o c i l e i n the face of Church a u t h o r i t y . And as much as he commanded h i s c h i l d r e n w i t h s t e r n and d o c t r i n a i r e e d i c t s , he included them n a t u r a l l y and amiably i n h i s work. In the r u r a l s e t t i n g , the worker's independence and necessary cooperativeness was marked i n p r a c t i c e by the advantages and r e s t r i c t i o n s of subsistence farming. And i f h i s world was, o v e r a l l , somewhat c l o s e d , f a m i l i a r and 32 p r e d i c t a b l e , i t was not v o c a t i o n a l l y or s o c i a l l y narrow. The r u r a l worker's measure of independence began w i t h h i s own s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y , h i s a b i l i t y to provide as much of h i s b a s i c m a t e r i a l needs as was f e a s i b l e , by h i s own means and w i t h h i s own hands. By way of c o n t r a s t , h i s Boston counterpart and others i n the n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l economy, drew t h e i r c h i e f means of s e l f - r e l i a n c e from the demand f o r t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r s k i l l s and a j u d i c i o u s management of those s k i l l s . In both cases, the c r u c i a l p r i n c i p l e s of work were to e s t a b l i s h a base of m a t e r i a l s u f f i c i e n c y , e i t h e r the subsistence farm or a h i g h l y market-able c r a f t s s p e c i a l t y , and then to become a necessary member of a wider economy of demand and opportunity. Workers i n Boston could not be c o n t r o l l e d by a c l a s s of i n d u s t r i a l despots. Indeed, the a t t i t u d e and conduct of Boston's c a p i t a l i s t s and senior merchants were, f o r the most p a r t , l i b e r a l and benign, as i n the examples of Boston merchants supporting l i c e n s e a p p l i c a t i o n s and funding the stock f o r s e m i - s k i l l e d workers. The s c a l e and u n i v e r s a l i t y of independent a r t i s a n s h i p meant that s k i l l e d s e r v i c e , manufacturing, or c o n s t r u c t i o n work was i n the 282 hands and under the c o n t r o l of i n d i v i d u a l tradesmen and was governed by the market c o n d i t i o n s of small s c a l e e n t e r p r i s e , competition and f r e e d i s p o s a l of l a b o r . These c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n e v i t a b l y lead to the problem of communal-ism versus s e l f i n t e r e s t ; and which of those f a c t o r s exerted the greatest i n f l u e n c e on the behavior and a t t i t u d e s of p r o v i n c i a l workers. C e r t a i n l y , according to one theory, i n d i v i d u a l i s m and self-improvement 38 were hallmarks of a l l work. For the subsistence farmer, e i t h e r as a part time a r t i s a n or as a landed l a b o r e r , more la n d , more la b o r and commodity c r e d i t and an even l a r g e r degree of s e l f - c o n t r o l over time and work were the c e n t r a l i n c e n t i v e s of working l i f e . For the Boston l a b o r e r , an unequivocal escape from h i s c o n d i t i o n was h i s s o l e , s e l f -i n t e r e s t e d aim; and the commercial a r t i s a n sought property and upward l e v e l s of e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l and business status as the ends of h i s l a b o r s . A l l these v a r i o u s forms of m a t e r i a l a s p i r a t i o n followed the i n d i v i d u a l ' s i n i t i a l and e a r l y securing of an economic place i n community l i f e . I t cannot be denied t h a t workers i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts d i d a s p i r e to a c o n d i t i o n of more: more e s t a t e , r e a l and p e r s o n a l , more economic independence and u l t i m a t e l y more c o n t r o l over t h e i r own and the working l i v e s of others. I t may w e l l be that a t t i t u d e s and e t h i c s were n o n - a l t r u i s t i c and s e l f i s h l y a c q u i s i t i v e . But economic c o n d i t i o n s a p p l i e d s e r i o u s r e s t r a i n t s to personal aggrand-izement. Independence and a c q u i s i t i v e n e s s could only be upheld w i t h i n the context of the l o c a l and communal economy. That economy functioned 283 only i n the p r a c t i c a l operation of l a b o r and economic interdependence , , , 34 and interchange. A balance was s t r u c k between the apparent motives of workers and the extent to which those i n t e n t i o n s could be r e a l i z e d . The community i t s e l f was the market c a t a l y s t f o r l a b o r and economic exchange, and w i t h i n the community the s e l f - i n t e r e s t e d i n d i v i d u a l was l i n k e d to the independent a c t i v i t i e s of a l l other workers. That i s not to say that working l i f e i n t h i s s o c i e t y was a g g r e s s i v e l y competitive and that the more able v i c t i m i z e d the l e s s a s s e r t i v e or l e s s capable. Rather, i t was i n the best i n t e r e s t of the i n d i v i d u a l to increase h i s own l i v e l i h o o d , comfort and s e c u r i t y by acceding to the independence of others. The r u r a l a r t i s a n s t i l l had to n e g o t i a t e mutually agreeable terms of goods and la b o r exchange w i t h the l e s s i n f l u e n t i a l husbandman; they served each other's purposes e f f e c t i v e l y i n a s e t t i n g that provided no cheap l a b o r pool or mass marketing of commodities, and d i d not encourage e i t h e r . So long as farms were small and farming was e x t e n s i v e l y widespread among the p o p u l a t i o n , l a b o r i n g and economic i n t e r c o u r s e was p e r s o n a l i z e d , f l u i d and c o n s t a n t l y a process of interdependence. In Boston, so long as c r a f t s were p e r s o n a l i z e d and not i n any way \" i n d u s t r i a l i z e d \" i n i n t e n s i v e and l a r g e s c a l e o r g a n i z a t i o n , the many l o c a l a r t i s a n s had to d e a l w i t h each other, as both p r o v i d e r and consumer and not w i t h an impersonal, detached \"employer,\" or market; nor could the Boston a r t i s a n hope to become such an employer. No matter how high he went, or how much i n f l u e n c e he exercised over the l a b o r of o t h e r s , the Boston a r t i s a n remained r e s p e c t f u l and dependent of the f r e e l a b o r of other a r t i s a n s i n the community. Perhaps the s e n i o r and w e a l t h i e r merchants of Boston s l i p p e d from the general r u l e s of economic and work r e c i p r o c a t i o n and mutual dependency, and can be seen as d i s t i n c t i v e economic creatures who had achieved the f u l l bloom of a c q u i s i t i v e s e l f - i n t e r e s t . But these men were exceptions to the whole of working l i f e i n the province. This group represented a very small m i n o r i t y i n Massachusetts and i f i t s i n f l u e n c e was d i s p r o p o r t i o n -ate to i t s s i z e , that i n f l u e n c e was at best i n d i r e c t and immaterial to the work h a b i t s and s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n s of the great m a j o r i t y of workers 35 i n Boston and i n the province as a whole. The s t a b i l i t y of the p r o v i n c i a l economy, as i t merged w i t h l a b o r c o n d i t i o n s and p r a c t i c e s , can be seen i n the phenomenon of Boston's growth and eventual s a t u r a t i o n and r e l a t i v e d e c l i n e . The end of p o p u l a t i o n and economic growth i n the town, i n the 1740s, was a conse-quence of the l i m i t s of eighteenth century p r o v i n c i a l commercial and i n d u s t r i a l c o n c e n t r a t i o n . The d i s p e r s a l of t r a d i t i o n a l Boston investment and c r a f t s e n t e r p r i s e s to other towns was only p a r t l y due to the appeal and growth of those other communities. By 1740, p r o v i n c i a l Boston had reached the extent of i t s c a p a c i t y to a t t r a c t , hold and expand any new economic a c t i v i t y or p o p u l a t i o n . Boston became crowded wi t h too many independent a r t i s a n s competing i n a s l a c k e n i n g economy. The t r a d i t i o n a l independent status, of the c r a f t s s p e c i a l i s t s r e q u i r e d 285 an atmosphere of m u l t i p l e s m a l l - s c a l e i n d u s t r i a l e n t e r p r i s e s , a wide and p e r s o n a l i z e d market f o r h i s s k i l l s and an opportunity f o r some expansion and property possession. Without the i n t r o d u c t i o n of concentrated, l a r g e s c a l e and mass production manufacturing f a c i l i t i e s , Boston could not expand i t s economic base. The p h y s i c a l l i m i t a t i o n s of the town, and the entrenched fragmented s c a l e of i t s commercial i n d u s t r i e s meant that without a serious, r e o r d e r i n g of i t s economy, the town's growth would e v e n t u a l l y s t a b i l i z e . Boston d i d not change i t s economic character and s t a b i l i z a t i o n occurred before the end of the • • i • A 36 p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d . In 1750, Boston merchants attempted to organize a l i n e n - t e x t i l e f a c t o r y , modelled on E n g l i s h and I r i s h examples of flo w production, i n d u s t r i a l technique and p r o f i t margins and q u a n t i t a t i v e and i n t e n s i v e l a b o r employment, only to see i t flounder a f t e r a few years of depressing f a i l u r e . The ambitious plan was r e s u r r e c t e d i n the l a t e 1760s, i n the midst of the non-importation clamor, and again f a i l e d . The scheme was doomed l a r g e l y because i t was too grandiose and premature. I t s f a i l u r e served n o t i c e of the severe l i m i t a t i o n s of the Massachusetts market, a market that provided i t s own t e x t i l e s much more e f f i c i e n t l y at the domestic and l o c a l l e v e l . Furthermore, the l i n e n manufacturing scheme could not f i n d a passive and needy s k i l l e d , s e m i - s k i l l e d and u n s k i l l e d . 3 7 work f o r c e to man i t . In the middle of the p r o v i n c i a l period Boston had stood as a s p e c i a l i z e d community of p r e - i n d u s t r i a l commerce and manufacturing. By 286 1750, i t served as a model of the mature p r e - i n d u s t r i a l Massachusetts commercial town. To grow again, i t would have to change. I t would r e q u i r e investment i n manufacturing i n d u s t r i e s , a l e s s s e l f - r e l i a n t market to serve, and an a v a i l a b l e l a b o r p o p u l a t i o n to operate and depend on i t s jobs and to r e l y on i t s wages. The market would have to increase s u b s t a n t i a l l y before any such changes could take place. In s h o r t , renewed growth i n Boston was contingent upon a r e s t r u c t u r i n g of i t s economy, and that would r e q u i r e a r a d i c a l change i n the economic, s o c i a l , v o c a t i o n a l and t e c h n i c a l standards and c o n d i t i o n s i n the town and i n the province. Boston would have to wait f o r the l a r g e r demand created by the n a t i o n a l United States market and a general d i m i n u t i o n of l o c a l and a g r i c u l t u r a l s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y . Those markets would be served by the development of the f a c t o r y system and i t s manning by a l a n d l e s s l a b o r f o r c e . These d i d not a f f e c t Boston u n t i l the e a r l y decades of the nineteenth century and to the end of the p r o v i n c i a l 38 period no such developments were i n s i g h t . The r u r a l town could grow and r e t a i n i t s f l u i d and m u l t i - v o c a t i o n a l l a b o r economy only i f i t could continue to provide subsistence farming o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r increased p o p u l a t i o n . Boston's growth was p r e d i c a t e d upon a s i m i l a r p r i n c i p l e of s c a l e and economic and v o c a t i o n a l balance. The end of Boston's growth d i d not s p e l l a change i n the commercial l a b o r economy of the town; r a t h e r , the town's f a i l u r e to grow r e f l e c t e d the market's r e s i s t a n c e to change, and confirmed the s t r e n g t h and d u r a b i l i t y of i t s labor economy. 287 Nevertheless, the c l e a r e s t observable change i n the l a b o r economy of pre-Revolutionary Massachusetts d i d occur i n the commercial s e c t o r ; i n the n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l small manufacturing and shop-industry economy. But even there the changes were not of general s i g n i f i c a n c e but were l a r g e l y s u p e r f i c i a l and i n v o l v e d a modest expansion of t r a d i t i o n a l shop i n d u s t r i e s . For a s t a r t , i n terms of numbers and geography, t h i s component of the province's economy was overshadowed 39 by the p e r s i s t e n t l y l a r g e r a g r i c u l t u r a l economy. Moreover, the changes were not s u b s t a n t i v e . They d i d not a f f e c t the way men worked or the o r g a n i z a t i o n and o r d i n a r y arrangements of s p e c i a l i z e d , i n d i v i d u a l -i z e d a r t i s a n and s e r v i c e work. Nor d i d the changes enlarge the commer-c i a l s e c t o r as a p r o p o r t i o n of the whole economy. There was no r e d i r e c t i o n of c a p i t a l investment i n new kinds of production items or methods, or i n d i s t r i b u t i o n technique. Instead i t was mostly a matter of r e l o c a t i o n , as some towns acquired a few shop i n d u s t r i e s f o r the f i r s t time and other p r e v i o u s l y p a r t l y commercial towns expanded t h e i r commercial economies at the expense of a g r i c u l t u r e . Here, i t might be argued, there was a measurable break w i t h the a g r a r i a n t r a d i t i o n . But these changes occurred only where commercial patterns had been e s t a b l i s h e d i n the previous century, and i n a few towns i n the extreme east of the province where s i z e and some l a n d l e s s n e s s , coupled w i t h the overflow of Boston's economy, changed the working l i v e s of some r e s i d e n t s . Those towns must be seen as exceptions. No s i m i l a r adjustments accrued to the r e s t of the province. There, subsistence farming continued to d e f i n e the l o c a l economies and dominate the economic and s o c i a l h a b i t s of workers. * * * * * * * * * * There was no \" t y p i c a l \" workman i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts, but a d i v e r s e p o p u l a t i o n of workers who shared s i m i l a r or comparable socio-economic goals. These were pursued i n one of two commonly shared economic s e t t i n g s and to a s l i g h t degree i n a t h i r d s e t t i n g that o f f e r e d elements of the two p r i n c i p a l modes. W i t h i n the shared econ-omies, workers possessed b a s i c independent means w i t h which to assure themselves and t h e i r f a m i l i e s of a measure of m a t e r i a l s e l f s u f f i c i e n c y C e r t a i n l y , t h i s s o c i e t y of workers was not without d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n and s t r a t i f i c a t i o n . There were degrees of wealth and i n f l u e n c e and con-t r a r y degrees of economic hardship and s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l e x c l u s i o n . Ther were v a r i o u s l a y e r s of economic c o n d i t i o n and opportunity. As revealed by t h i s study, some men and t h e i r f a m i l i e s and some groups had more opp o r t u n i t y to advance or improve themselves than d i d o t h e r s , and some l i v e d r i c h e r , f u l l e r and more secure and s a t i s f y i n g l i v e s . But very l i t t l e of t h i s represented extremes of wealth and poverty, and none of i t was based upon perpetuated or a r b i t r a r y q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of genealogy or l o c a t i o n . In the working l i v e s of t h i s p o p u l a t i o n , and by extension i n i t s s o c i a l order, there was greater e q u a l i t y and s t a b i l i t y of c o n d i t i o n than there was d i s p a r i t y and m o b i l i t y . 289 In terms of e q u a l i t y and s t a b i l i t y and t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p to the l a c k of economic change i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts, Stuart Bruchey has noted that a minimum \"of h o r i z o n t a l s o c i a l movement . . . tended to make f o r a r e l a t i v e l y l e s s e r degree of v e r t i c a l m o b i l i t y . \" Moreover, he claimed, \"probably i n few s o c i e t i e s i n h i s t o r y have the means of subsistence been so widely d i s t r i b u t e d \" as i n e a r l y Massachusetts. The combination of r e s i d e n t i a l p e r s i s t e n c e , i n s u l a r i t y and subsistence a g r i c u l t u r e created what Bruchey c a l l s an \"ignorance of want . . . , without wants markets cannot e x i s t and to the extent that f a m i l i e s and communities enjoyed a high degree of s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y , to the extent that t r a n s p o r t a t i o n o b s t a c l e s and low incomes per c a p i t a l i m i t e d the s i z e of markets, s p e c i a l i z a t i o n and the d i v e r s i f i c a t i o n of the economy, to that extent [economic] growth was i n h i b i t e d . \" As growth i n the economy was i n h i b i t e d , so too were s u b s t a n t i v e changes i n the 40 economy. I t i s p o s s i b l e to l o c a t e s o c i a l , economic and p o l i t i c a l \" c l a s s e s \" i n p r o v i n c i a l s o c i e t y , but i t i s not so easy to i d e n t i f y a \"working c l a s s . \" In any case, the most s i g n i f i c a n t q u a l i t y of work and workers i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts was the s t r e n g t h of the s o c i a l and economic i n s t i t u t i o n s that surrounded l a b o r , and the d u r a b i l i t y of l a b o r ' s p r a c t i c e d forms, and the s t a b i l i t y these r e f l e c t e d of the h i s t o r i c a l background. So f a r as work was concerned, the eighteenth century was not so much an overture to the nineteenth century as i t was an extension of the seventeenth century. 290 NOTES CHAPTER IX ^Baker, MSS. For the l a t e seventeenth and e a r l y eighteenth c e n t u r i e s , among the most graphic a r t i s a n accounts are those of \"Jacob Adams\" (shoemaker), \"Blacksmith's Ledger,\" \"Cockerel Reeves\" ( l a b o r e r ) , \"Jacob Nash\" (Sawyer, l a b o r e r , handyman), MHS MSS, \"John M a r s h a l l D i a r y \" (mason). For the mid and l a t e p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , among the most thorough accounts and papers are, Baker, MSS, \"Nathaniel Chamberlin\" ( b l a c k s m i t h ) , \"John Reed\" (shoemaker), \"Pyam Cushing\" (merchant, s t o r e -keeper), \"Edward M a r r e t t \" ( t a i l o r ) , \"John Hayward\" ( t a n n e r ) , and MHS MSS, \"Joseph Andrews J o u r n a l \" (farmer). E s p e c i a l l y u s e f u l f o r c h r o n o l o g i c a l comparison because they cover the e n t i r e p e r i o d , are Baker, MSS, \"Ebenezer Wright Accounts\" (weavers) 1708-1790, \"Pearson Family Accounts\" ( m i l l e r s , carpenters) 1684-1799, \" B a r t l e t t Accounts\" (weavers, t a i l o r s ) 1704-1765. Adams and Reed, shoemakers, at e i t h e r end of the pe r i o d and i n widely separated l o c a t i o n s (east and west), operated on almost i d e n t i c a l socio-economic p r i n c i p l e s , using the same techniques, and production and b a r t e r methods, and both farmed. 2 MHS Misc. Bd. MSS, October 1695, \" A r t i c l e s of Agreement\" (a seven page c o n t r a c t i n v o l v i n g over t h i r t y a r t i s a n s ) ; February 1759, \"Wentworth L e t t e r . \" A l s o , see \" H a l l o w e l l Report\" (1956) i n M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 117, pp. 64-5, 67-8, and V o l . 7, \"Commercial\" ( s h i p p i n g , 1697-1714). MHS Misc. Bd. MSS, March 1726/7, \"Caulkers Contract.\" 3M. Arch. MSS, V o l s . 29-34, \"I n d i a n \" and \"Indian T r e a t i e s \" ; V o l s . 67-79, \" M i l i t a r y . \" A good summary of pre-Revolutionary m i l i t i a h i s t o r y and i t s purposes, a c t i o n s and o r g a n i z a t i o n s can be found i n John Shy, Toward Lexington, The Role of the B r i t i s h Army i n the Coming of the R e v o l u t i o n (New York: 1965), Chapters 1 and 2. Shy p o i n t s out that p r i o r to 1754 the province was v i r t u a l l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the mostly capable of i t s own m i l i t a r y needs, on land at l e a s t . 4 Lemuel Shattuck, Report . . to Obtain the . . . Census (Boston: 1946), pp. 71-2, 126-133; John Blake, P u b l i c H ealth i n the Town of Boston 1630-1822 (Cambridge: 1959); BCR, V o l . 8, pp. 154-167, V o l . 13, pp. 81-2, 308, V o l . 14, pp. 221, 238; MHS Misc. Bd. MSS, J u l y 24, 1752. 291 Richard Shyrock, Medicine and Soc i e t y i n America, 1660-1860 (Boston: 1960). There are v i v i d and touching d e s c r i p t i o n s of p e r i o d i c , l o c a l r u r a l epidemics of contagious disease i n \"John M a r s h a l l D i a r y \" f o r 1697, 1701 and 1711. There i s a huge l i t e r a t u r e on the e c c l e s i a s t i c a l h i s t o r y of eighteenth century Massachusetts. Much of the work to 1970 i s c i t e d and reviewed i n Michael M c G i f f e r t , \"American P u r i t a n Studies i n the 1960s,\" WMQ 27 (1970), pp. 36-67. S t i l l the best s i n g l e study of the in t e r t w i n e d t h e o l o g i c a l , e s s l e s i a s t i c a l and p o l i t i c a l e v o l u t i o n of the p r o v i n c i a l Church i s Perry M i l l e r , The New England Mind: From Colony to Province (Cambridge: 1953). A d i f f e r e n t approach, but w i t h s i m i l a r emphasis on the r e l i g i o u s and p o l i t i c a l causes and e f f e c t s of change, i s Alan Heimert, R e l i g i o n and the American Mind from the Great Awakening to the Re v o l u t i o n (Cambridge: 1966). On the numbers and l o c a t i o n s of \"new\" sects i n 1775, see Map 1, t h i s paper. 7 l b i d . This unchanging character of work and working arrange-ments i n the face of changing r e l i g i o u s a t t i t u d e s and s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l alignments, i s i n some way contrary to the t h e s i s of d e c l i n i n g \"corporatism\" and r i s i n g \" s e l f - i n t e r e s t \" and \" a c q u i s i t i v e n e s s . \" This theme, a l b e i t set i n Connecticut, i s most p e r s u a s i v e l y developed i n Richard Bushman, From P u r i t a n to Yankee: Character and the S o c i a l Order i n Connecticut, 1690-1763 (Cambridge: 1967). A l s o , see Chapter I I , Note 45 i n t h i s paper, and note 31 below. g Andrew MacFarlane Davis, Currency and Banking i n the Province of Massachusetts Bay (New York: 1901); Jacob F e l t , An H i s t o r i c a l Account of Massachusetts Currency (Boston: 1839). 9 I b i d . On the r a t e s of i n f l a t i o n a f t e r 1740, see M. Arch. MSS, Vo l s . 101-102, \"Pecuniary.\" X ^ F o r example, the o f f i c i a l wage r a t e f o r a l l s k i l l e d a r t i s a n work rose g r a d u a l l y from about 2/- (Massachusetts currency) per day i n . . the mid-to l a t e - seventeenth century to about 4/6 per day i n the 1730s. I t jumped to between 30/- and 40/- a day i n the 1740s and s e t t l e d a t 5/- to 5/6 when the Massachusetts currency was s t a b i l i z e d and revalued i n 1750. (\"Old Tenor\" to \"Lawful Money\").. Except f o r the 1740s, Massachusetts currency was u s u a l l y valued at between 75% and 85% S t e r l i n g . On the speed at which workers' wage r a t e s were adjusted to slow or sudden changes, r e v a l u a t i o n s , d e p r e c i a t i o n s , i n f l a t i o n s and d e f l a t i o n s i n currency value and commodity p r i c e s , see the Account Books of \"Daniel Rea,\" \"Edward M a r r e t t , \" \" B a r t l e s s Family,\" \"Pearson Family,\" and \"Pyam Cushing\" ( a l l at Baker, MSS). Many of these and other a r t i s a n s kept t h e i r accounts i n two or three d i f f e r e n t monetary 292 values. A l s o , see \"Wages i n the C o l o n i a l P e r i o d \" (U.S. Bureau of Labor S t a t i s t i c s , B u l l e t i n 499, 1929). On the r e l a t i o n s h i p between wage r a t e s and property and commodity p r i c e s and v a l u e s , see F e l t , Massachusetts Currency, appendices, and A.H. Cole, Wholesale Commodity P r i c e s i n the U.S., 1700-1861 (Cambridge: 1938), p. 5 and Appendix A. On s l o w l y r i s i n g wage v a l u e s , e s p e c i a l l y against wheat p r i c e s , see \"Wages i n C o l o n i a l Pico Daybook\" and compare w i t h Cole, Commodity P r i c e s . \"^On merchants and Imperial monetary p o l i c y , see e s p e c i a l l y C u r t i s P. N e t t e l s , The Money Supply of the American Colonies Before 1720 (Madison, Wisconsin: 1934). 12 The R e v o l u t i o n stands l i k e a monolith to the h i s t o r i o g r a p h y of p r o v i n c i a l America. Leaving aside the enormous and c o n t r o v e r s i a l l i t e r a t u r e of \"consensual\" versus \" c o n f l i c t \" t h e o r e t i c a l causes of the R e v o l u t i o n , and the i n t e l l e c t u a l , p u r e l y p o l i t i c a l , economic and i d e o l o g i c a l r o o t s and l i n k a g e s to the R e v o l u t i o n (see Bernard B a i l y n , \"The C e n t r a l Themes of the American R e v o l u t i o n \" i n Kurtz and Hutson, eds., Essays on the American R e v o l u t i o n (New York: 1973) and passim), a u s e f u l example of using the R e v o l u t i o n as a means of t r a c i n g long term p r o v i n c i a l s o c i a l r e s t r u c t u r i n g and change i s J . F r a n k l i n Jameson, The American R e v o l u t i o n Considered as a S o c i a l Movement (Boston: 1963, r e p r i n t ) . A w e l l argued v e r s i o n of the theory of \"macro\" change and \"micro\" s t a b i l i t y , w i t h strong relevance to p r o v i n c i a l f a m i l i e s , farming and l a b o r , i s J.A. Henretta, \" F a m i l i e s and Farms: M e n t a l i t e i n Pre-I n d u s t r i a l America,\" WMQ 35 (1978), pp. 3-32. Appendix I I I ; M. Arch. MSS, V o l s . 130-134, \" V a l u a t i o n s . \" Kenneth Lockridge, \"Land, P o p u l a t i o n and the E v o l u t i o n of New England S o c i e t y , and an Afterthought,\" i n Katz, ed., C o l o n i a l America. . . (Boston: 1971)admits to c o n t i n u i n g a v a i l a b i l i t y of land w h i l e arguing smaller p a r c e l s of subsistence farm h o l d i n g s , pp. 472-73. However, h i s \"crowding\" t h e s i s f a i l s to respect the p h y s i c a l l i m i t s of s i n g l e - f a m i l y farming and the t r a d i t i o n a l dual o c c u p a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s of subsistence farmers. Lockridge does detect and show changed c o n d i t i o n s and trends i n many towns, but h i s t h e s i s i s more a p p l i c a b l e to the .1780-1800 pe r i o d than to the l a t e p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d . See P.W. B i d w e l l and John Falconer, H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e i n the Northern United S t a t e s , 1620-1860 (Washington: 1925), pp. 69-101. 1 4M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 94, \"Muster R o l l s \" ; V o l s . 130-134, \"Valu-a t i o n s of Towns\"; Lockridge, \"Land, P o p u l a t i o n \" ; B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 115-146; Manfred Jonas, \"The W i l l s of the E a r l y S e t t l e r s of Essex County,- EIHC 96 (1960), pp. 228-35; E.P. Hamilton, \" E a r l y Industry of the Neponset and Charles,\" MHS Proceedings 71 (1959), pp. 108-123. See M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 130, i n p e r t i n e n t county and town s e c t i o n s . 293 On the seventeenth century c o n d i t i o n s see H.W. Belknap, Trades and Tradesmen of Essex County (Salem: 1929); on l a t e r p o p u l a t i o n growth and land d i s t r i b u t i o n see M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 130, \"Newbury\" and \"Ipswich.\" Jacob F e l t , H i s t o r y of Ipswich, Essex, and Hamilton (Cambridge: 1834). 16 Lo c k r i d g e , \"Land, P o p u l a t i o n , \" pp. 474-76; P h i l i p Greven J r . , Four Generations: P o p u l a t i o n , Land and Family i n C o l o n i a l Andover, Massachusetts (It h a c a : 1970). ± 7 S i d n e y P e r l e y , H i s t o r y of Salem (1926): W.I. Davisson and D.J. Duggan, \"Commerce i n Seventeenth Century Essex County,\" EIHC 107 (1971), pp. 113-43; Bruno Foreman, \"Salem Tradesmen and Craftsmen, c. 1762,\" EIHC 107 (1971), pp. 62-82; D.W. Koch, \"Income D i s t r i b u t i o n and P o l i t i c a l S t r u c t u r e i n Seventeenth Century Salem,\" EIHC 105 (1969), pp. 50-71. M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 130 gives r e l a t i v e farming u n i t s , \" i n d u s t r i a l \" f a c i l i t i e s and personal income assessments. 18 P e r l e y , H i s t o r y of Salem; C a r l Bridenbaugh, C i t i e s i n Revolt (New York: 1955), p. 216. 1 Q BCR, V o l . 14, pp. 220-22, 238, 40, 280-82; M. Arch., V o l . 117, pp. 60-70. on M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 130, \" V a l u a t i o n s \" ; V o l . 94, \"Muster R o l l s . \" 21 I b i d . , and Lockridge, \"Land, P o p u l a t i o n . \" 22 Baker, MSS,\"V.S. C l a r k Notes,\" Box 6, notes 600 f u l l - t i m e and \"self-employed\" fishermen i n 1721, and as many as 1,100 fishermen a l l t o l d (he c i t e s Board of Trade e s t i m a t e s ) . For the p o l l s and e s t a t e s of the main f i s h i n g communities, see M. Arch. MSS, 130, \"Gloucester,\" \"Marblehead,\" \"Plymouth.\" Sidney P e r l e y , \"Marblehead i n 1700,\" EIHC 48 (1912), pp. 79-84, de s c r i b e s the economics of f i s h i n g . 23 L o i s K i m b a l l Mathews, The Expansion of New England (Boston: 1909), pp. 43-138. On pop u l a t i o n growth i n the c o u n t i e s , see Appendix I I I , i ( t h i s paper). In 1770, of a t o t a l of n e a r l y 200 towns, only 13, i n c l u d i n g Boston, had more than 3,000 r e s i d e n t s . See \" C a r r i n g t o n Bowles\" (London: 1772), c i t e d i n D i r k Hoerder, Crowd A c t i o n i n Revolutionary Massachusetts (New York: 1977), endpapers. Only four towns — Boston, Salem, Gloucester, and Marblehead — contained more than 1,000 p o l l s (adult white males) and the l a t t e r two only b a r e l y 294 over 1,000. See M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 130. On n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l technology, l o c a t i o n and o r g a n i z a t i o n , see V.S. C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufactures i n the United S t a t e s , 1607-1860 (Washington: 1916), pp. 159-64, 181. On farming \" p r i m i t i v e n e s s \" and p e r s i s t e n c e of methods see B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 84 f f . 2 4 B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 84 f f . ; M. Arch MSS, \" V a l u a t i o n s \" f o r 1767, 1771, 1801; MHS MSS \" V a l u a t i o n s f o r Counties, .1751\"; Chapter I I and Appendices I I I and IV ( t h i s paper). 25 Mathews, Expansion of New England, pp. 43-138; B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 71-2. 2 6 MHS Misc. Bound MSS, D e c , 1764, \" L e t t e r to Captain Falconer.\" The scheme a t t r a c t e d about s i x t y of an expected 500 f a m i l i e s . G. Stewart and G. Rawlyk, A People H i g h l y Favored of God: The Nova S c o t i a Yankees and the American R e v o l u t i o n (Toronto: 1972), Chapter 1, estimate that some 12,000 New Englanders s e t t l e d i n Nova S c o t i a between 1758 and 1775. But not a l l were from Massachusetts and many were r e l i g i o u s p o l i t i c a l d i s s i d e n t s and not a g r i c u l t u r a l migrants. 27 B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 49-59; Lockridge, \"Land, P o p u l a t i o n \" ; M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 1, \" A g r i c u l t u r e . \" 28 Greven, Four Generations, found that even i n \"crowded\" Essex county, l i g h t but steady emigration i n the m i d - p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , and the slow decrease i n d i v i s i b l e i n h e r i t a n c e (and more primogeniture) helped to s u s t a i n subsistence farming f o r a constant percentage of the p o p u l a t i o n . On the c o n t i n u i n g s c a l e of farming as a part-time a c t i v i t y , B i d w e l l , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e , pp. 84 f f . notes i t s appeal and repeats the words of General Warren of Massachusetts, w r i t i n g i n 1786: \"One miserable team, a p a l t r y plow and everything i n the same p r o p o r t i o n ; three acres of Indian corn . . . as many acres of h a l f - s t a r v e d E n g l i s h g r a i n . . . and a small yard of t u r n i p s complete the t i l l a g e , and the whole i s conducted, perhaps, by a man and a boy, and performed i n h a l f t h e i r time\" (p. 85, emphasis added). Warren, l i k e most contemporaries, and most h i s t o r i a n s , laments the waste and crudeness of eighteenth century American farming, compared to the e f f i c i e n c y of E n g l i s h a g r i -c u l t u r e . Labor, much of i t l a n d l e s s , and more advanced techniques, made E n g l i s h farming more \"pr o d u c t i v e . \" I t i s my b e l i e f that farm operation and l a b o r u t i l i z a t i o n i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts were t i e d to the socio-economic exigencies of extensive popular land h o l d i n g and not to c r i t e r i a of i n t e n s i v e p r o d u c t i v i t y and p r o f i t . For the e a r l y modern trends i n E n g l i s h a g r i c u l t u r e , see W.E. Minchinton, ed., Essays i n A g r a r i a n H i s t o r y (London: 1968). 295 29 Sumner C h i l t o n P o w e l l , P u r i t a n V i l l a g e : The Formation of a New England Town (Wesleyan U n i v e r s i t y : 1963), pp. 168-186. A l s o , see Chapter I I , notes 12, 13, 14, i n the present paper. 30 The p r i n c i p a l p e r s o n a l i z e d manuscript workers' r e c o r d s , mostly i n accounts but i n some d i a r i e s , j o u r n a l s and daybooks, and w i t h con-s i d e r a b l e commentary i n some cases, are l o c a t e d i n Baker, MSS; MHS Miscellaneous Bound MSS, 1652-1765 (unindexed); Mass. A r c h i v e s MSS, e s p e c i a l l y Volumes 1, 8, 39-44, 59, 112-118, 244-254; Boston P u b l i c L i b r a r y , Boston Town Papers. See B i b l i o g r a p h y below. 31 This p a r t i c u l a r stereotype i s found, f o r example, i n Edmund Morgan, V i s i b l e S a i n t s . . . ( I t h a c a , N.Y.: 1963) and The P u r i t a n Family (New York: 1966) and i n M i l l e r , Colony to Province and i n Vernon L. P a r r i n g t o n , Main Currents i n American Thought: The C o l o n i a l Mind,' 1620- 1800 (New York: 1927). P a r r i n g t o n notes the balance and c o n f l i c t between the \" t r a d i t i o n a l . . . p r u d e n t i a l m o r a l i t y . . . , u n c r e a t i v e , conservative and c o n v e n t i o n a l \" and the \"generous, k i n d l y . . . embodiment of v i l l a g e , f r i e n d s h i p , \" pp. 88-98. He sees Samuel Sewall as the paradigm f o r the s e l f - i n t e r e s t e d but cooperative \" P u r i t a n Yankee.\" 32 See the comments on the backgrounds and a c t i v i t i e s of these and other workers i n Chapters I I I , IV and V i n t h i s paper. 33 The s o c i a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l s u b t l e t i e s of t h i s d i f f i c u l t q uestion are d e a l t w i t h i n some depth i n J.E. Crowley, This Sheba S e l f : The C o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of Economic L i f e i n Eighteenth Century America (Baltimore: 1974). 34 For a broader and more, t e c h n i c a l treatment of the r e s t r a i n t s on c a p i t a l accumulation, labor e x p l o i t a t i o n and personal economic independence, see J.R.T. Hughes, S o c i a l C o n t r o l i n the C o l o n i a l Economy ( C h a r l o t t e s v i l l e , Va.: 1976). Hughes l a y s more emphasis on \"non-market c o n t r o l \" ( i . e . , laws, customs, p o l i c i e s ) than on the n a t u r a l s o c i a l and economic r e s t r a i n t s of the l i m i t e d and p e r s o n a l i z e d Massachusetts economy. C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufactures, i s more concerned w i t h the s i z e (small) and unique components (many small c o m petitive \" u n i t s \" ) of the economy, pp. 144-158, e s p e c i a l l y . For a d i f f e r e n t view, and exceptions, see Bushman, P u r i t a n to Yankee. 35 I b i d . On the economic p h i l o s p h i e s and the i n f l u e n c e s of merchants, see, f o r example, Bernard B a i l y n , New England Merchants i n the Seventeenth Century (New York: 1955); Charles McLean Andrews, Boston Merchants and the Non-Importation Movement ( r e p r i n t , Boston: 1968); Stuart Bruchey, The Roots of American Economic Growth (New York: 1965), Chapter 3. 296 J U C a r l Bridenbaugh, C i t i e s i n the Wilderness . . . 1625-1742 ( r e p r i n t , New York: 1966), pp. 364-481 and C i t i e s i n Revolt . . . 1743-1776 ( r e p r i n t , New York: 1971), pp. 250-292; G.B. Warden, Boston, 1689-1776 (Boston: 1970), Chapter 4. On the p h y s i c a l impediments to Boston's growth i n the eighteenth century, see Walter Muir W h i t e h i l l , Boston, A.Topographical H i s t o r y (second e d i t i o n , Cambridge: 1968). 3 7MHS MSS, \" E z e k i a l P r i c e Papers, 1754-85,\" sheets 141-322; W.R. B a g n a l l , The T e x t i l e I n d u s t r i e s of the United States (Cambridge: 1893), pp. 28-40; M. Arch. MSS, V o l . 59, pp. 381-84, 391-94, 427-29, 290-94; BCR, V o l . 14, pp. 230 f f . 38 P o s s i b l y , socio-economic c o n d i t i o n s d i d begin to change during and a f t e r the R e v o l u t i o n , see Alan K u l i k o f f , \"The Progress of I n e q u a l i t y i n Revolutionary Boston,\" WMQ 28 (1971), pp. 375-412. But e a r l i e r v o c a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s appear to have survived t h i s p e r i o d , see the o c c u p a t i o n a l census i n BCR, V o l . 10, pp. 171 f f . 39 S t i l l , the importance to labor p r a c t i c e s of the province's commercial economy, both as an a l t e r n a t i v e and as a c o n t r a s t to agrarianism, cannot be denied. Though i t remained a p r i n c i p a l economic mode f o r a m i n o r i t y of p r o v i n c i a l workers, that m i n o r i t y was numeric-a l l y l a r g e . And i t s presence and permanence i n the p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d would have important r a m i f i c a t i o n s i n the l a t e r economic development of Massachusetts. See C l a r k , H i s t o r y of Manufactures, pp. 233 f f . In the e a r l y nineteenth century, when the State was becoming more i n d u s t r i a l i z e d and l e s s a g r a r i a n , the e a r l y f a c t o r i e s (mostly t e x t i l e and footwear) were f i r s t manned by the sons and grandsons of p r o v i n c i a l commercial workers, along w i t h d i s p l a c e d farm workers. L a t e r , t h i s i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n was b o l s t e r e d by the a v a i l a b i l i t y of l a r g e numbers of European immigrants. Bruchey, Roots of American Economic Growth, pp. 60, 63. APPENDIX I ACCOUNT SAMPLE The f o l l o w i n g samples are taken from the \"John Reed Account Book, 1740-69\" (Baker, MSS 641 R324) and are intended to i l l u s t r a t e the extensiveness of the b a r t e r system i n r u r a l towns. Reed was a shoe-maker-farmer i n Weymouth i n c o a s t a l southern S u f f o l k county, about twelve m i l e s from Boston. H i s example i s q u i t e t y p i c a l of other a r t i s a n s p r a c t i c i n g other c r a f t s and trades i n other p a r t s of Massachusetts throughout the 1690-1765 p e r i o d . Reed's farm was c l o s e to the average p r o v i n c i a l s i z e and contained twenty acres of combined t i l l a g e , c u l t i v a t e d grass, pasture and orchard. The f i r s t l i s t deals w i t h the v a r i e t y of goods which Reed recei v e d f o r shoe manufacture and r e p a i r . I t i n v o l v e s some t h i r t y separate customers f o r the twelve months f o l l o w i n g February, 1742/3. A l l e n t r i e s have attached monetary values but none are given here; l i t t l e money changed hands and the purpose here i s to denote the v a r i e t i e s of exchange and not \"income\". Among the items Reed rece i v e d as c r e d i t were: h i d e s , m i l k , r y e , c a l f - s k i n s , a pound of f a t , cash, t u r n i p s , f l a x , honey, meat, earthenware, an almanac, dry f i s h , two p i g s , wool, s a l t , hay, molasses, o i l , plums, b i s c u i t s , c i d e r , casks, f i s h . Reed b u i l t (or had b u i l t ) a house i n 1742-43, and he r e c e i v e d the f o l l o w i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n m a t e r i a l s i n b a r t e r : p o s t s , c l a y , r a i l s , 1,000 s h i n g l e s , 1,000 b r i c k s , pavements, l i m e , clapboards, planks. For h i s shop, Reed r e c e i v e d from l o c a l s u p p l i e r s , i n b a r t e r : four dozen h e e l s , a s i d e of cured l e a t h e r , tacks. Reed rece i v e d the f o l l o w i n g farm and r e l a t e d l a b o r : from a c l i e n t ' s s l a v e , Sambo, s p l i t t i n g r a i l s , plowing, d r i v i n g plow f o r two acr e s , s l i d i n g s i x loads of wood. From 297 298 a c l i e n t ' s w h i t e s e r v a n t , c a r t i n g h i d e s t o B r a i n t r e e , a d a y ' s wo rk p l a n t i n g , one day t h a t c h i n g a b a r n , a d a y ' s work h o e i n g , m o r t i s i n g e i g h t p o s t s . F rom c u s t o m e r s t h e m s e l v e s , Reed r e c e i v e d , c a r t i n g dung and h a y , h e l p i n g i n c a r r y i n g h a y , c a r t i n g c o r n , c a r t i n g s t o n e s , g a t h e r i n g c o r n and p i c k i n g a p p l e s , h o e i n g , mowing , b u t c h e r i n g . F o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f h i s d w e l l i n g , Reed c r e d i t e d a mason w i t h ch imney w o r k , l a y i n g p a t h s , p l a s t e r i n g , m a k i n g m o r t a r , u n d e r p i n n i n g , \" y o u and N a t h a n i e l ' s w o r k . \" From a b l a c k s m i t h he r e c e i v e d , ax s h a r p e n i n g , a h o e , a s p i n d l e . From a t a i l o r , a f r o c k , d o u b l e t , j a c k e t and b r i t c h e s , and a l s o \" d r i v i n g my p l o w \" and \" y o u r w i f e f o r w o r k . \" He a l s o had a deed w r i t t e n and \" b o r r o w e d h o r s e s . \" Reed b a l a n c e d a l l o f t h e s e s e r v i c e s and goods w i t h s h o e -m a k i n g . The f o l l o w i n g i s a d e b i t and c r e d i t a c c o u n t o f J o h n R e e d ' s d e a l i n g s w i t h J o h n P o r t e r who was a c a r t e r , f a r m e r , weave r and g e n e r a l handyman. The two c o n d u c t e d s i m i l a r t r a n s a c t i o n s f r o m a b o u t 1751 u n t i l 1 7 7 5 . The a c c o u n t was u s u a l l y b a l a n c e d a n n u a l l y . DEBIT (Reed t o P o r t e r ) 1 7 6 3 : m i l k , b a r l e y and e i g h t p a i r s o f s h o e s f o r P o r t e r , h i s w i f e and two o t h e r s . 1 7 6 4 : \"Two hands (Reed and h i s son) o n e - h a l f d a y ' s p l a n t i n g , \" \" t h r e e -q u a r t e r s o f l e a t h e r f o r B e n \" (a c r e d i t o r o f P o r t e r ' s ) , \" w o r k a t y o u r c a v e ( q u a r r y ) , \" e i g h t e e n e n t r i e s f o r shoes o r r e p a i r s . CREDIT ( P o r t e r t o Reed) 1 7 6 3 : n i n e e n t r i e s f o r c a r t a g e ( h a y , d u n g , s t o n e s , g r a i n ) , m a k i n g s i x b a r r e l s o f c i d e r , \" c a s h , \" d r e s s i n g my h o g s , \" \" w e a v i n g f i f t e e n y a r d s , \" \" f o r So lomon (a son) o n e - h a l f d a y ' s m o w i n g . \" 1 7 6 4 : t w e l v e e n t r i e s f o r c a r t a g e ( d u n g , s t o n e s , r y e , l i m e , b o a r d s ) , \" r e a p i n g , \" \" k i l l i n g b e e f , \" \" d r e s s i n g h o g s , \" \" m a k i n g f o u r b a r r e l s o f c i d e r . \" 299 DEBIT (Reed to Por t e r ) CREDIT (Porter to Reed) 1765: \" f i v e and one-half pounds 1765: nine e n t r i e s f o r cartage, of v e a l , \" \"helped unload boat (hay c a r t ) and stack hay,\" \" b a r l e y , \" \"400 (?) of s a l t , hay,\" fourteen e n t r i e s f o r shoes and r e p a i r s . 1766 to 1769: a t o t a l of s i x t y -\" p a r s n i p s , \" \"mowing and r a k i n g f o r one-half day,\" \"d r e s s i n g a c a l f , \" \"twenty-one b a r r e l s c i d e r . \" 1766 to 1769: f i f t e e n e n t r i e s f o r one shoes and shoe-repair t r a n s -a c t i o n s and nothing e l s e . cartage. In 1767, \"weaving t h i r t y -e i g h t yards of c l o t h . \" In 1768, f i f t y yards. And throughout, o c c a s i o n a l work (as above) i n the f i e l d s , b u t c h e r i n g , and c i d e r supply. I t can be seen that both men exchanged c e r t a i n s p e c i a l t i e s : Reed h i s c r a f t and P o r t e r h i s labor and h i s a b i l i t y to c a r t , make c i d e r and weave. These kinds of r e l a t i o n s h i p s were repeated s e v e r a l times between Reed and others and between P o r t e r and others. Of s p e c i a l note i s the o c c a s i o n a l exchange of labor between the two men and t h e i r f a m i l i e s ; t h i s was done o f t e n to balance any d i s p a r i t y i n the monetary value i n the accounts. In most years no money changed hands between the two men. APPENDIX I I BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE B i b l i o g r a p h i c a l note on currency, wages, p r i c e s , property and commodity values and t h e i r meanings. Among the best general s t u d i e s are: BRUCHEY, STUART. The Roots of American Economic Growth, 1607-1860 (New York: 1965). COLE, A.H. Wholesale Commodity P r i c e s i n the United S t a t e s , 1700- 1861 (Cambridge: 1938). DANIELS, BRUCE. \" D e f i n i n g Economic Classes i n C o l o n i a l Massachusetts,\" AAS Proceedings 83 (1973), 251-59. DAVIS, ANDREW. Trac t s R e l a t i n g to the Currency of Massachusetts Bay, 1682-1720 (Boston: 1902). . Currency and Banking i n the Province of Massachusetts Bay (New York: 1901). FELT, JACOB. An H i s t o r i c a l Account' of Massachusetts Currency (Boston: 1839). MAIN, J.T. The S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e of Revolutionary America ( P r i n c e t o n : 1965), e s p e c i a l l y pp. 68-163. WEEDON, W.B. Economic and S o c i a l H i s t o r y of New England, 1620-1789 (New York: 1890). 301 For wage and p r i c e r e g u l a t i o n i n p r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts, see R.B. MORRIS, Government and Labor i n E a r l y America (New York: 1946). For o f f i c i a l sources of r e g u l a t i o n and of t a x i n g r a t e s and procedures, see Mass. Bay Recs. V o l s . 1-5; Acts and Resolves, V o l s . 1-5; BCR, V o l s . 7-20; Boston Town Papers, V o l s . 1-7. The l a t t e r two and G.B. WARDEN, \"The D i s t r i b u t i o n of Property i n Boston, 1692-1775\" i n Per s p e c t i v e s i n American H i s t o r y 10 (1976), 81-128, c o n t a i n u s e f u l i n f o r m a t i o n , data and reference to property values and the sources f o r f u r t h e r data. The best manuscript c o l l e c t i o n s f o r wages, p r i c e s , property and commodity values are the v a r i o u s l o c a l and county Probate and Deed records and MHS Misc. Bd. MSS, passim, MHS \"Merchants\" catalogue, \"Thwing Catalogue\"; M. Arch. MSS, \"Commercial,\" \"Pecuniary,\" \"Trade,\" \"Treasury,\" \"Valuations of Towns\"; Baker MSS \"Account Books.\" The Essex I n s t i t u t e at Salem contains a great many merchant account books and ledgers i n c l u d i n g values of s h i p s , cargoes and seamen's wages. A l s o , see U.S. Bureau of Labor S t a t i s t i c s , B u l l e t i n 499 \"Wages i n the C o l o n i a l P e r i o d \" ; B u l l e t i n 604 \" H i s t o r y of Wages\"; \"The C o l o n i a l Worker i n Boston, 1775\" (1976). 302 APPENDIX I I I ( i ) Po p u l a t i o n Data No. of Po p u l a t i o n of Massachusetts Percent Increase P o p u l a t i o n ...of Boston Boston Year Towns White Black T o t a l White Black T o t a l 1700 84 55,941 800 13.0 6,300 400 6,700 1710 c94 62,390 1,300 11.5 - - 9,000 1720 clOO 91,008 2,150 45.8 - - 11,000 1730 128 114,116 2,780 25.4 11,900 1,100 13,000 1740 cl 5 1 151,613 3,035 32.8 15,008 1,374 16,382 (1742) 1750 173 188,000 4,075 24.0 14,190 1,544 15,734 (1752) 1760 192 (1765) 222,600 4,866 18.4 14,390 1,241 15,631 1770 212 (1775) 235,308 4,744 5.4 14,672 848 15,520 (1765) The Black p o p u l a t i o n f i g u r e s i n c l u d e : a d u l t s , c h i l d r e n , f r e e and sl a v e s . Sources: H i s t o r i c a l Data; H i s t o r i c a l S t a t i s t i c s ; Shattuck, Census, pp. 2-6, 42-65; Boston Town Papers, V o l . 7, p. 24; BCR, V o l . 15, p. 369. Number of a d u l t b l a c k slaves by county i n 1754 (number of towns i n b r a c k e t s ) . S u f f o l k (18) 1,270 adult s l a v e s , i n c l u d i n g 989 i n Boston; Essex (20) 439; Middlesex (36) 361; Worcester (27) 88; B r i s t o l (11) 122; Hampshire (21) 74; Barnstable (9) 76; Plymouth (14) 133; York (13) 147; Dukes (3) 7; Nantucket (1) 0. T o t a l Slave P o p u l a t i o n : 2,717. Average Per Town: 10 (ex c l . Boston). Source: \"Government Census, 1754-55\" i n MHS Misc. Bd. MSS. 303 APPENDIX I I I ( i i ) D e t a i l s of Massachusetts P o p u l a t i o n (1750-1) T o t a l P o p u l a t i o n (Black and White): Adult White Males: Number of Houses: Numbers per Household: Number of Bla c k s : Number of Adult Slaves: Sources: 192,075 41,126 25,263 7.60 (average) 4,075 2,841 \"Valuations f o r the Counties, 1751,\" MHS Misc. Bd. MSS, \"Government Slave Census, 1754,\" i n MHS Misc. Bd. MSS. H i s t o r i c a l S t a t i s t i c s . D e t a i l s of Boston P o p u l a t i o n (1742): T o t a l P o p u l a t i o n : Number of Houses: Numbers per Household: Number of \" F a m i l i e s \" : Adult White Males: D e t a i l s of Boston P o p u l a t i o n (1765): T o t a l P o p u l a t i o n : Number of Houses: Numbers per Household: Number of \" F a m i l i e s \" : Adult White Males: A l l Whites above 16 Years: A l l Whites under 16 Years: A l l Males: A l l Females: Sources: 16,382 1,719 9.52 (average) 2,000 2,972 15,520 1,676 9.26 (average) 2,069 2,941 6,553 8,119 7,041 7,622 Boston Town Papers, V o l . 7, p. 24. BCR , V o l . 15, p. 369. 304 APPENDIX I I I ( i i i ) Estimated P o p u l a t i o n (White and Black) of Counties In 1751 and 1765 County * 1751 1765 Percent Increase Essex 35,325 43,735 23.80 S u f f o l k 30,235 36,338 20.18 Middlesex 30,097 33,687 11.92 Worcester 20,900 30,378 45.35 Plymouth 18,028 22,033 22.21 B r i s t o l 15,225 17,976 18.06 Hampshire 15,125 17,245 ' 33.92 1 York 12,847 10,644 69.23 Barnstable 9,592 11,948 24.56 Nantucket 2,433 3,377 38.79 Dukes 1,967 2,406 22.31 Be r k s h i r e 3,029 -(from part of Hampshire i n 1761) Cumberland 7,454 -(from part of York i n 1761) L i n c o l n 3,644 -(from part of York i n 1761) Massachusetts TOTAL 192,075 243,894 26.97 Estimated on the b a s i s of 4.67 p o p u l a t i o n per p o l l f o r the t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n (the r a t i o f o r the a c t u a l census of 1765) and the r e l e v a n t r a t i o s from the census f o r the counties. ^Includes B e r k s h i r e . 2 Includes Cumberland and L i n c o l n . Sources: MHS MSS \"Valuations of the Counties, 1751\" (see Appendix IV i n the present paper); f o r the 1765 census, see J o s i a h Henry Benton, E a r l y Census Making i n Massachusetts . . . w i t h a r e - production of the l o s t Census of 1765. . . (Boston: 1905). A P P E N D I X I V Valuation of the Several Counties i n the Province of Massachusetts Bay in 1751 (Taken Verbatim from MS at MHS) County Total Acreage In C u l t i v a t i o n Number of Rateable P o l l s Dwelling Houses G r i s t , F u l l i n g and Saw M i l l s Bloomery and Forges Acres of of Orchard Barrels of Cider Acres of T i l l a g e Bushels of Grain Pounds of Flax and Hemp Massachusetts 580,200 41,126 25,263 814 50 14,286 150,665 104,774 1,413,470 349,092 Suffolk 68,252 6,518 4,200 88 7 2,121 21,851 7,804 121,379 28,746 Essex 117,548 7,622 4,778 115 1 2,684 39,635 7,360 246,249 67,627 Middlesex 100,325 6,488 4,175 129 2 3,120 40,717 20,187 292,263 75,819 Hampshire 37,243 3,243 1,468 64 2 902 10,878 20,490 190,713 51,941 Worcester 55,013 4,493 2,696 115 2 1,482 13,523 12,077 177,220 53,841 Plymouth 56,266 3,870 2,416 107 23 1,490 8,031 11,624 124,326 31,188 Barnstable 35,212 2,040 1,282 38 13 46 38 8,343 49,119 13,240 B r i s t o l 57,188 3,262 2,326 94 - 2,000 12,012 11,842 106,713 18,980 York 35,302 2,746 1,410 59 - 436 3,960 3,569 86,742 6,042 Dukes 13,682 386 246 7 - 5 20 977 11,950 1,668 Nantucket 4,169 487 266 3 - - — 501 6,796 OJ o APPENDIX IV (continued) County Acres of Mowing Tons of English Hay Tons of Meadow and Salt Hay Acres of Pasture Slaves From 12 to 50 Years Horses and Mares 3 Years Old - Up Cows (Cattle) 3 Years Old - Up Goats 1 Year Old - Up Swine 1 Year Old - Up Sheep 1 Year Old - Up Massachusetts 212,279 51,927 127,550 248,861 2,930 22,061 79,614 3,091 18,732 233,502 Suffolk Essex Middlesex Hampshire Worcester Plymouth Barnstable B r i s t o l York Dukes Nantucket 23,735 39,553 43,906 13,815 29,279 19,388 6,651 19,176 15,095 1,129 552 6,816 9,947 9,184 4,911 1,134 5,785 182 7,467 5,947 307 207 12,574 23,925 29,611 9,331 14,563 11,427 9,113 7,580 8,540 746 140 34,592 67,951 33,112 2,036 12,175 23,764 20,172 24,170 16,202 11,571 3,116 1,274 405 503 88 69 172 80 189 129 16 5 2,362 3,265 4,265 2,736 2,907 1,901 868 2,250 1,142 206 159 8,853 13,674 15,960 4,826 10,503 7,754 3,909 6,866 5,997 800 472 490 46 20 137 525 391 117 454 101 808 2 1,473 2,348 2,724 1,296 2,029 2,726 1,094 2,608 2,199 233 2 22,700 21,743 28,386 14,051 26,691 26,124 19,639 33,717 11,162 12,551 6,738 o ON BIBLIOGRAPHY MANUSCRIPTS [1] Baker L i b r a r y Manuscripts and Archives D i v i s i o n , Harvard Graduate School of Business A d m i n i s t r a t i o n . V.S. C l a r k Notes ( s i x boxes). Type s c r i p t of O r i g i n a l Documents, Lynn Iron Works. Account Books and Ledgers (catalogued a l p h a b e t i c a l l y ) : Anonymous Blacksmith's Ledger Jacob Adams John Baker B a r t l e t t Family N a t h a n i e l Chamberlin Pyam Cushing H o p e s t i l l Foster John Hyaward Bayes Manchester Edward Marrett John M e t c a l f Jacob Nash Mathew Noble John Parker Pearson Family Joseph P i c o D a n i e l Rea John Reed Cockerel Reeves James R u s s e l l A b i d i j a h Upton Ebenezer Wright. [2] Boston P u b l i c L i b r a r y . Boston Town Papers, Volumes 1-7. [3] P u b l i c A r c hives of Massachusetts, State House, Boston. (Catalogued a l p h a b e t i c a l l y , c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y , t o p i c a l l y and n u m e r i c a l l y ) . V o l . 1, \" A g r i c u l t u r e \" V o l . 7, \"Commercial\" V o l . 8, \"Depositions\" 307 308 V o l . 9, \"Domestic R e l a t i o n s \" V o l . 15A, \"Emigrants\" V o l . 15B-19, \" E s t a t e s \" V o l . 38B-44, \" J u d i c i a l \" V o l . 45-46, \"Lands\" V o l . 59, \"Manufactures\" V o l . 60-66, \"Maritime\" V o l . 67-80, \" M i l i t a r y \" V o l . 91-99, \"Muster R o l l s \" V o l . 100-104, \"Pecuniary\" V o l . 112-118, \"Towns\" V o l . 130-134, \"Valuations of Towns\" V o l . 244-254, \"Accounts.\" [4] Massachusetts H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y , Boston. (Catalogued by name). Joseph Andrews J o u r n a l Benjamin Bangs D i a r y Joseph Belknap Papers Cushing Papers Hancock Papers John M a r s h a l l D i a r y Robert Treat Paine Papers E z e k i a l P r i c e Papers Benjamin Wadsworth Papers and D i a r y . Sermons of Thomas Barnard, Charles Chauncy, Samuel Cooper. Roxbury V a l u a t i o n s of 1727. P r i c e ' s Boston Maps of 1739 and 1769. Thwing Catalogue. Miscellaneous Bound Manuscripts, 1690-1765, 20 Volumes, arranged c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y . [5] Houghton L i b r a r y Manuscripts, Harvard U n i v e r s i t y . W i l l i a m P a l f r e y Legal and F i n a n c i a l Papers. 309 PUBLISHED PRIMARY SOURCES Acts and Resolves, P u b l i c and P r i v a t e , of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, 1692-1786, 21 V o l s . , i n c l u d i n g Appendices (Boston: 1869-1922. C o l o n i a l Laws of Massachusetts, Reprinted from the E d i t i o n of 1672 w i t h the Supplements to 1686 (Boston: 1889. C o l l e c t i o n s of O r i g i n a l Papers R e l a t i v e to the H i s t o r y of Massachusetts Bay, e d i t e d by Thomas Hutchinson (Boston: 1769). Journal of the House of Representatives, 1715-1770, 46 V o l s . (Boston: 1919-1975). Records of the Governor and Company of the Massachusetts Bay i n New England, 1626-1686 (Boston: 1853-4). Reports of the Record Commissioners of Boston (records of the Town Meeting of Boston and Selectmen's Minutes f o r the seventeenth and eighteenth c e n t u r i e s ) , 39 V o l s . (Boston: 1876-1909). Watertown Records, 1634-1829 (Watertown: 1894-1939). B r a i n t r e e Records, 1640-1793. Dedham Records, 1635-1845. Weston Records, 1746-1826. SECONDARY SOURCES Anonymous, American Husbandry (London: 1775). Some Observations R e l a t i n g to Massachusetts (Boston: 1750) . , The Town and Country B u i l d e r ' s A s s i s t a n t (Boston: 1786). Adams, James T., P r o v i n c i a l S o c i e t y , 1690-1763 (New York: 1927). Ahlstrom, Sidney, A R e l i g i o u s H i s t o r y of the American People (New Haven: 1972). Ames, E l l i s , No T i t l e , MHS Proceedings 10 (1868), 370-75. Andrews, Charles McL., The C o l o n i a l Background to the American R e v o l u t i o n (New York: 1924). 310 Andrews, Charles McL., The.Colonial P e r i o d of American H i s t o r y (New Haven: 1934). , Boston Merchants and the Non-Importation Movement ( r e p r i n t , New York: 1968). B a g n a l l , W.R., The T e x t i l e I n d u s t r i e s of the United States . . . (Cambridge: 1893). Baker, Mary R., \"Anglo-Massachusetts Trade Union Roots, 1130-1790,\" Labor H i s t o r y 14 (1973), 352-396. B a i l y n , Bernard, Education i n the Forming of American S o c i e t y (Chapel H i l l : 1960). , New England Merchants i n the Seventeenth Century (New York: 1955). and L o t t e B a i l y n , Massachusetts Shipping, 1697-1714 - A S t a t i s t i c a l Study (Cambridge: 1959). and John C l i v e , \"England's C u l t u r a l P r o v i n c e s , Scotland and America,\" WMQ 11 (1954), 200-13. Beeman, Rich a r d , \"The New S o c i a l H i s t o r y and the Search f o r 'Community' i n C o l o n i a l America,\" AQ_ 29 (1977), 422-43. Belknap, H.VJ., Trades and Tradesmen of Essex County, Massachusetts, C h i e f l y of the Seventeenth Century (Salem, Mass.: 1929). Benton, J o s i a h , Warning Out i n New England, 1656-1817 (Boston: 1911). , \" E a r l y Census Making i n Massachusetts, 1643-1765,\" MHS Proceedings, 2nd S e r i e s , V o l . 4, 136-9. B i d w e l l , Percy, The R u r a l Economy i n New England ( H a r t f o r d : 1916). and John F a l c o n e r , H i s t o r y of A g r i c u l t u r e i n the Northern United S t a t e s , 1620-1860 (Washington: 1925). Blake, John, P u b l i c Health i n the Town of Boston, 1630-1860 (Cambridge: 1959) . B o l t o n , E t h e l , \"Immigrants to New England, 1700-75,\" EIHC 63-67 (1927-31) . B o o r s t i n , D a n i e l , The Americans: The C o l o n i a l Experience (New York: 1959). Bowker, M e t c a l f , T r e a t i s e on A g r i c u l t u r e and P r a c t i c a l Husbandry (Providence: 1786). Bradley, F.B., \"The Salem I r o n Factory,\" EIHC 54 (1918), 97. Bridenbaugh, C a r l , C o l o n i a l Craftsmen (New York: 1950). , C i t i e s i n the Wilderness, the F i r s t Century of Urban L i f e i n America, 1625-1742 (New York: 1938). , C i t i e s i n R e v o l t , Urban L i f e i n America, 1743-76 (New York: 1955). , \"The High Cost of L i v i n g i n Boston, 1728,\" NEQ 5 (1932), 800-11. Brown, Robert E., Middle Class Democracy and the R e v o l u t i o n i n Massachusetts, 1691-1780 ( I t h a c a , New York: 1955). Bruchey, S t u a r t , The Roots of American Economic Growth, 1607-1860 (New York: 1965). Bushman, Ri c h a r d , From P u r i t a n to Yankee: Character and the S o c i a l Order i n Connecticut, 1690-1763 (Cambridge: 1967). Cappon, L e s t e r , e d i t o r i n c h i e f , A t l a s of E a r l y American H i s t o r y : The Revolutionary Era, 1760-1790 (P r i n c e t o n : 1976). C a r r i e r , Lyman, The Beginnings of A g r i c u l t u r e i n America (New York: 1923). Chapman, S.D., \"The T e x t i l e Factory Before Cartwright: A Typology of Factory Development,\" Business H i s t o r y Review 48 (1974), 451-78. C l a r k , V i c t o r , H i s t o r y of Manufactures i n the United S t a t e s , 1607-1860 (Washington: 1916). Cole, A.H., The American Wool Manufacture (New York: 1926). , Wholesale Commodity P r i c e s i n the United S t a t e s , 1700-1861 (Cambridge: 1938). Coleman, D.C., \"Labour i n the E n g l i s h Economy of the Seventeenth Century,\" EHR 8. (1956), 283-295. Commons, J.R. et a l . , H i s t o r y of Labor i n the United States (New York: 1918). Coxe, Trench, A View of the United States of America (London: 1794). Cremin, L., American Education: The C o l o n i a l Experience (New York: 1970). Crevecouer, J . Hector, St. J . , L e t t e r s From An American Farmer (Rep r i n t , New York: 1916). Crowley, J.E., This Sheba S e l f : The C o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of Economic L i f e i n Eighteenth Century America (Baltimore: 1974). Cummings, A.L., R u r a l Household I n v e n t o r i e s (Boston: 1964). D a n i e l s , Bruce, \" D e f i n i n g Economic Classes i n C o l o n i a l Massachusetts, 1700-1776,\" AAS Proceedings 83 (1973), 251-59. Davisson, W.I., and D.J. Duggan, \"Commerce i n Seventeenth Century Essex County,\" EIHC 107 (1971), 113-43. Davis, Andrew McF., Tra c t s R e l a t i n g to the Currency of Massachusetts Bay, 1682-1720 (Boston: 1902). , Currency and Banking i n the Province of Massachusetts Bay. Demos, John, A L i t t l e Commonwealth: Family L i f e i n Plymouth Colony (New York: 1970). Dunn, Ric h a r d , \"The S o c i a l H i s t o r y of E a r l y New England,\" AQ_ 24 (1972), 661-79. E a r l e , A l i c e , Home L i f e i n C o l o n i a l Days ( R e p r i n t , Stockbridge: 1974) Egnal, Marc, \"The Economic Development of the T h i r t e e n C o n t i n e n t a l C o l o n i e s , 1720-1775,\" WM£ 32 (1975), 191-222. and Joseph E r n s t , \"Economic I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the R e v o l u t i o n , WMQ 29 (1972). F e l t , Jacob, An H i s t o r i c a l Account of Massachusetts Currency (Boston: 1839). , H i s t o r y of Ipswich, Essex and Hamilton ( T o p s f i e l d , Mass.: 1923). Foreman, Bruno, \"The Account Book of John Gould, Weaver,\" EIHC 105 (1969), 36-49. , \"Salem Tradesmen and Craftsmen, c. 1762,\" EIHC 107 (1971), 62-82. 313 Gaustad, Edwin, The Great Awakening i n New England (New York: 1957). Greene, E v a r t s , B., P r o v i n c i a l America, 1690-1740 (New York: 1905). Greene, Jack, \"Autonomy and S t a b i l i t y : New England and the B r i t i s h C o l o n i a l Experience,\" JSH 7 (1974), 171-94. , \"Search f o r I d e n t i t y : An I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the Meaning of S o c i a l Response i n Eighteenth Century America,\" JSH 3 (1970), pp. 189-220. Greene, Lorenzo, The Negro i n C o l o n i a l New England (New York: 1945). G r e v e n , , P h i l i p , Four Generations: P o p u l a t i o n , Land and Family i n C o l o n i a l Andover, Massachusetts ( I t h a c a , N.Y.: 1970). Gross, Robert, The Minutemen and Their World . . . (New York: 1976). Hamilton, Edward, \" E a r l y Industry of the Neponset and C h a r l e s , \" MHS Proceedings 71 (1959), 108-23. Har r i n g t o n , V i r g i n i a , and E.B. Greene, American P o p u l a t i o n Before the Federal Census of 1790 (New York: 1932). Hart, A l b e r t B., Commonwealth H i s t o r y of Massachusetts (New York; 1927). Haskins, George L., Law and A u t h o r i t y i n E a r l y Massachusetts (New York: I960). Hazard, Blanche, The Organization of the Boot and Shoe Industry i n Massachusetts before 1875 (Cambridge: 1921). Heimert, A l a n , R e l i g i o n and the American Mind: From the Great Awakening to the R e v o l u t i o n (Cambridge: 1966). Henretta, James, The E v o l u t i o n of American S o c i e t y , 1700-1815 (Boston: 1973). , \"Economic Development and S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e i n Colonial-Boston,\" WMQ 22 (1965), 75-92. , \"The Morphology, of New England So c i e t y i n the C o l o n i a l P e r i o d , \" i n R.I. Rotberg and T.K. Rabb, e d i t o r s , The Family i n H i s t o r y (New York: 1972). , \" F a m i l i e s and Farms: M e n t a l i t e i n P r e - I n d u s t r i a l America,\" WMQ 35 (1978), 3-32. 314 Hobsbawm, E r i c , Labouring Men: Studies i n the H i s t o r y of Labour (New York: 1967). H o f s t a d t e r , R i c h a r d , America at 1750: A S o c i a l P o r t r a i t (New York: 1973). Hohman, Elmo, H i s t o r y of American Merchant Seamen (New York: 1956). Hughes, J.R.T., S o c i a l C o n t r o l i n the C o l o n i a l Economy ( C h a r l o t t e s -v i l l e : 1976). Innes, Stephen, \"Land Tenancy and S o c i a l Order i n S p r i n g f i e l d , Massach-u s e t t s , 1652-1702,\" WMQ 35 (1978), 33-56. Isaac, Rhys, \"Order and Growth, A u t h o r i t y and Meaning i n C o l o n i a l New England,\" AHR 76 (1971), 728-37. Jameson, J.F., The American R e v o l u t i o n Considered as a S o c i a l Move- ment (R e p r i n t , Boston: 1963). Jernegan, Marcus, Laboring and Dependent Classes i n C o l o n i a l America (Chicago: 1931). Johnson, Edward, Wonder Working Providences of Scion's Savior i n New England (1655), (New York: 1910 e d i t i o n ) . Johnson, E.A.J., American Economic Thought i n the Seventeenth Century (London: 1932). Jonas, Manfred, \"The W i l l s of the E a r l y S e t t l e r s of Essex County,\" EIHC 96 (1960), 228-35. Jones, A l i c e , \"Wealth Estimates f o r the New England C o l o n i e s , About 1770,\" JEH 32 (1972), 98-rl27. Jones, Douglas, \"The S t r o l l i n g Poor: Transiency i n Eighteenth Century Massachusetts,\" JSH 8 (1975), 28-54. Kammen, M i c h a e l , Empire and I n t e r e s t (New York: 1970). K e l s o , R.W., H i s t o r y of P u b l i c Poor R e l i e f i n Massachusetts (Boston: 1922). Koch, D.W., \"Income D i s t r i b u t i o n and P o l i t i c a l S t r u c t u r e i n Seventeenth Century Salem,\" EIHC 105 (1969), 50-75. K u l i k o f f , A l a n , \"The Progress of I n e q u a l i t y i n Revolutionary Boston,\" WMQ 28 (1971), 375-412. 315 Lo c k r i d g e , Kenneth, A New England Town: The F i r s t Hundred Years, Dedham, Massachusetts (New York: 1970). , \"Land, Po p u l a t i o n and the E v o l u t i o n of New England S o c i e t y , 1630-1790: and an Afterthought,\" i n S. K a t z , e d i t o r , C o l o n i a l America (Boston: 1971). and Alan K r e i d e r , \"The E v o l u t i o n of Massachusetts Town Govern-ment, 1640-1740,\" WMQ 23 (1966), 549-74. M c G i f f e r t , M i c h a e l , \"American P u r i t a n Studies i n the 1960s,\" WMQ 27 (1970), 36-67. McKee, S., Labor i n C o l o n i a l New York (New York: 1935). McLear, Anne Bush, E a r l y New England Towns: A Comparative Study of Th e i r Development (New York: 1908). McManus, Edgar, Black Bondage i n the North (Syracuse: 1973). Macpherson, C.B., \"Servants and Labourers i n Seventeenth Century England,\" i n Democratic Theory: Essays i n R e t r i e v a l (Oxford: 1973). Maier, P a u l i n e , From Resistance to R e v o l u t i o n . . . (New York: 1972). Main, J.T., The S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e of Revolutionary America ( P r i n c e t o n : 1965). Massachusetts Secretary of S t a t e , H i s t o r i c a l Data R e l a t i n g to the C i t i e s , Towns and Counties of Massachusetts (Boston: 1975). Mathews, L o i s K., The Expansion of New England (Boston: 1909). Menard, R u s s e l l R., \"From Servant to Freeholder: Statu s , M o b i l i t y and Property Accumulation i n Seventeenth Century Maryland,\" WMQ 32 (1973), 37-64. M i l l e r , P e r r y , The New England Mind: From Colony to Province (Cambridge: 1953). Minchinton, W.E., e d i t o r , Essays i n A g r a r i a n H i s t o r y (London: 1968). Morgan, Edmund, The P u r i t a n Family (New York: 1944). M o r r i s , Richard B., Government and Labor i n E a r l y America (New York: 1946). 316 M o r r i s , Richard B., \"American Labor H i s t o r y P r i o r to the C i v i l War: Sources and Opportunities f o r Research,\" Labor H i s t o r y 1 (1960) , 308-18. Moxon, Joseph, Mechanick E x e r c i s e s . . . (London: 1703). M u r r i n , John, \"Review Essay,\" H i s t o r y and Theory 11 (1972), 226-75. , \" A n g l i c i z i n g an American Colony: The Transformation of P r o v i n c i a l Massachusetts,\" Ph.D. T h e s i s , Y a l e , 1966. Nash, Gary, C l a s s and Society i n E a r l y America (New York: 1970). N e i f e l d , Maurice, Representative B i b l i o g r a p h y of American Labor H i s t o r y (New York: 1960). N e t t e l s , C u r t i s , The Money Supply of the American Colonies Before 1720 (Madison, W i s e : 1934). . \"The Menace of C o l o n i a l Manufacturing,\" NEQ 4 (1931), 230-269. P a i n , W i l l i a m , The P r a c t i c a l House Carpenter (Boston: 1796). , The Carpenter's Rules of Work i n the Town of Boston (Boston: 1795). P a l f r e y , John G., H i s t o r y of New England (Boston: 1858). P a r r i n g t o n , Vernon, The C o l o n i a l Mind, V o l . I of Main Currents i n American Thought (New.York:_1927). P e r l e y , Sidney, H i s t o r y of Salem (Salem: 1926). ;, \"Marblehead i n 1700,\" EIHC 48 (1912), 79-84. P h i l l i p s , James, \"The Salem S h i p b u i l d i n g Industry Before 1812,\" American Neptune 2 (1942), 278-88. P o t t e r , David, People of P l e n t y (Chicago: 1954). P o t t e r , J . , \"The Growth of P o p u l a t i o n i n America, 1700-1860,\" i n Glass and E v e r s l e y , e d i t o r s , P o p u l a t i o n i n H i s t o r y (London: 1965). P o w e l l , Sumner C., P u r i t a n V i l l a g e : The Formation of a New England Town (Middletown, Conn.: 1963). P r i c e , Jacob, \"New Time Series f o r Scotland's and B r i t a i n ' s Trade w i t h the T h i r t e e n C o l o n i e s , 1740-1791,\" WMQ 32 (1975), 307-325. Rutman, D a r r e t t , Husbandmen of Plymouth: Farms and V i l l a g e s i n the Old Colony, 1620-1692 (Boston: 1967). , Winthrop's Boston, 1630-1649 (Chapel H i l l : 1965). R u s s e l l , Howard, A Long Deep Furrow: Three Centuries of Farming i n New England (Hanover, N.H.: 1976). Sachs, W.S. and A. Hoogenboom, The E n t e r p r i s i n g C o l o n i a l s : S o c i e t y on the Eve of the R e v o l u t i o n (Chicago: 1965). S c h l e s i n g e r , A.M., The C o l o n i a l Merchants and the American R e v o l u t i o n ( R e p r i n t , New York: 1968). Seybolt, Robert F., The Town O f f i c i a l s of C o l o n i a l Boston, 1630-1775 (Cambridge: 1939). , Apprenticeship and Apprenticeship T r a i n i n g i n C o l o n i a l New England and New York (New York: 1917). Shattuck, Lemuel, Report to the Committee of the C i t y C o u n c i l to Obtain the Census f o r the Year 1845 (Boston: 1846). Shipton, C l i f f o r d , S i b l e y ' s Harvard Graduates, 17 Volumes, (Boston: 1873-1975). , \"Immigration to New England, 1680-1740,\" J o u r n a l of P o l i t i c a l Economy 44 (1936), 225-236. Shy, John, Toward Lexington: The Role of the B r i t i s h Army i n the Coming of the R e v o l u t i o n (New York: 1965). Shyrock, R i c h a r d , Medicine and So c i e t y i n America, 1660-1860 (Boston: 1960). S h u r t l e f f , N.B., A Topographical and H i s t o r i c a l D e s c r i p t i o n of Boston ( (Boston: 1871). Smith, Abbot, C o l o n i s t s i n Bondage: White Servitude and Convict Labor i n America (Chapel H i l l : 1947). Smith, D a n i e l S., \"The Demographic H i s t o r y of C o l o n i a l New England,\" JEH 32 (1972) , 165-83. 318 Smith, Page, As a C i t y Upon a H i l l : The Town i n American H i s t o r y (New York: 1966). Stephens, Edward, R e l i e f of Apprentices Wronged by T h e i r Masters (London: 1687). Thomas, K e i t h , \"Work and L e i s u r e i n P r e - I n d u s t r i a l S o c i e t y , \" Past and Present 29 (1964), 50-66. Thwing, Annie, The Crooked and Narrow S t r e e t s of Boston (Boston: 1920). Tryon, R o l l a , Household Manufactures i n the United S t a t e s , 1640-1860 (Chicago: 1917). Towner, Lawrence, \"A Fondness f o r Freedom: Servant P r o t e s t i n P u r i t a n S o c i e t y , \" WMQ 19 (1962), 201-219. , \"The Indentures of Boston's Poor Apprentices, 1734-1805,\" C o l o n i a l S o c i e t y of Mass. Transactions 43 (1956-63), 417-468. , \"A Good Master Well Served: A S o c i a l H i s t o r y of Servitude i n Massachusetts, 1620-1750,\" Ph.D. T h e s i s , Northwestern, 1955. U.S. Bureau of the Census, H i s t o r i c a l S t a t i s t i c s : C o l o n i a l Times to the Present (Washington: 1961) . U.S. Bureau of Labor S t a t i s t i c s , \" H i s t o r y of Wages,\" B u l l e t i n No. 604 (1934). , \"Wages i n the C o l o n i a l P e r i o d , \" B u l l e t i n No. 499 (1929). , \"The C o l o n i a l Worker i n Boston, 1775,\" (1976). Ver Steeg, Clarence, The Formative Years, 1607-1763 (New York: 1964). Walcott, Robert, \"Husbandry i n C o l o n i a l New England,\" NEQ_ 9 (1936), 218-52. W a l l e t , F r a n c i s , e d i t o r , The D i a r y of Ebenezer Parkman (Worcester: 1974). Warden, G.B., Boston, 1689-1776 (Boston: 1970). 319 Warden, G.B., \"The D i s t r i b u t i o n of Property i n Boston, 1692-1775,\" Pe r s p e c t i v e s i n American H i s t o r y 10 (1976), 81-128. , \" I n e q u a l i t y and I n s t a b i l i t y i n Eighteenth Century Boston: A R e a p p r a i s a l , \" JIH 6 (1976), 585-620. Weedon, W.B. Economic and S o c i a l H i s t o r y of New England, 1620-1789, 2 Volumes (New York: 1890). Wertenbaker, T.J., The F i r s t Americans, 1607-90 (New York: 1927). W h i t e h i l l , Walter M., Boston, A Topographical H i s t o r y (Cambridge: 1968). Whitmore, W.H., Massachusetts C i v i l L i s t f o r the C o l o n i a l and P r o v i n c i a l P e r i o d s , 1630-1774 (Albany, N.Y.: 1870). Winsor, J u s t i n , The Memorial H i s t o r y of Boston, 4 Volumes (Boston: 1881). Wroth, Kinwin, \" P o s s i b l e Kingdoms: The New England Town from the P e r s p e c t i v e of Legal H i s t o r y , \" J o u r n a l of Legal H i s t o r y 15 (1971), 318-330. Zuckerman, M i c h a e l , \" S o c i a l Context of Democracy i n Massachusetts,\" WMQ 25 (1968), 523-44. , Peaceable Kingdoms: New England Towns i n the Eighteenth Century (New York: 1970). JOURNAL COLLECTIONS: American A n t i q u a r i a n S o c i e t y P u b l i c a t i o n s . Essex I n s t i t u t e H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n s Massachusetts H i s t o r i c a l Society C o l l e c t i o n s and Transactions. New England H i s t o r i c a l and Genealogical R e g i s t e r . W i l l i a m and Mary Qua r t e r l y . "@en ; edm:hasType "Thesis/Dissertation"@en ; edm:isShownAt "10.14288/1.0094874"@en ; dcterms:language "eng"@en ; ns0:degreeDiscipline "History"@en ; edm:provider "Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library"@en ; dcterms:publisher "University of British Columbia"@en ; dcterms:rights "For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use."@en ; ns0:scholarLevel "Graduate"@en ; dcterms:title "Communities of workers: free labor in provincial Massachusetts, 1690-1765"@en ; dcterms:type "Text"@en ; ns0:identifierURI "http://hdl.handle.net/2429/21913"@en .