Theodore L. Steinberg’s article Dam-breaking in the 19th-century Merrimack Valley: Water, Social Conflict, and the Waltham-Lowell Mills discusses an example of American dispute between a company and residents of the Merrimack Valley regarding land use.

In 1859, the Lake Village dam at Folsom’s Falls was attacked by a group of townspeople who were fed up with the Lake Companies perceived misuse of waterways. Decades prior, the Lake Company claimed that their top priorities were “navigation and waterpower,” (44) claims made to ease the worry of citizens who did not wish to see their farming, mercantilism, steamboat operations, and more disrupted by lack of water. Because the Lake Company demanded year-round control of the water supply, compromises were in terms of control of the waterways or levels of water. Before the attack, Josiah French, the Company’s proprietor, was well aware of discontent amongst locals, but this awareness did not cause the Lake Company to change their practices. Steinberg argues that the 1959 attack on the damn is indicative of the “struggle over nature to Industrial capitalism.” (57)

While Pursell introduces Chapter 2 as a narrative regarding American resistance to technological change, the attacks seen in the Merrimack Valley are indicative less of shear resistance to change than they are dissatisfied with a company’s mismanagement of resources, robbing a region of its chances to become a textile powerhouse, and most importantly - failure to keep promises. (57) (–Glynnis Farleigh)

I thought it was interesting and important story to tell. The attacks on the dams illustrate the viewpoint of the American people who were facing industrialization problems. It is important to remember the extended length it took to make the transition from a more rural and agricultural society to the industrialized capitalist nation we are known to be. Another very important idea that this article brings up is that industrialization has it's set backs that, when not limited, can spiral into an area being drained of its resources and its residents left with a hollow shell of their former homes. These are aspects that are critical, but often overlooked and this chapter helps change that. - Kendell Jenkins

In this reading Steinberg describes the “dam-breaking” of the Lake Company’s dam system. Steinberg explains how the profit making Lake Company continued to build upon the dam system built before and it began it affect the surrounding communities negatively. As a result of these negative impacts the surrounding people began to rise against the Lake Company. Josiah French is quoted saying the dam’s would be “looked upon as an infringement upon the interest of their neighborhood, town and state,” and soon after those around the infrastructure did resist. While changes in technology are seen is progress it is important to note that it does not necessarily have a positive impact on those around it. -Emma Monaghan

Throughout this reading an overarching theme that I got was how people used and learned from the environment to create tools to improve their lives. It was interesting to see how they learned from the way that the waters worked to then taking action by purchasing the different waterways that they needed to control the flow.(pg 43) It almost seems like a game that they were playing to monopolize their trade. I have never learned about any of this technology before and it is really cool to see how even back then they were able to figure this out. I also found the parts about how Abbot Lawrence was able to pretty much trick the Massachusetts government into allowing them to control the water by the way that they described the bill he wanted passed.(pg 44) Overall I found this very interesting that they were able to control the rivers to power their mills and over time evolve the technology to what they needed. I have a better understanding now that along with last week's reading, history is not what it seems and there's a lot more technology involved in processes than I thought. - Tory Martin

In this reading Pursell goes in depth about industrial transformation by bringing up an incident that happened in Massachusetts in 1859. A company named “The Proprietors of Locks and Canals on Merrimack River (PLC)” had a dam located on Folsom Falls in Lake Village that controlled the the water that powered the mills located downstream. The dam caused a lot of difficulties for farmers in the town because of its flooding or lack of water. This led to an attack on the dam by the citizens of the village in an attempt to cause industrial change. “It reflects the tension and conflict that arose over industrial change, a struggle over who would control the natural world and to what ends”.(pg 42) This was interesting to me because I thought the attack on the dam would be to get the water to the village more efficiently, but it was more of a symbolic statement made by the citizens to target industrial capitalism. -Nick Bass

The Winnipisiogee Lake Company v Worster was a “ bill filed in the clerk's office on the 18th of April,1853.” p(60). The bill focuses on waterfall and mill privileges being “seized and possessed” on the Winnipisiogee river. To resolve the issues between plaintiffs and the defendant, “a temporary injunction was granted, ex parte, by one of the justices of this court (p.63).” This was only under the condition that “ the complainants should give bonds in the sum of $5,000, for the security of the defendant.” In the end, the defendant went under investigation. “The motion to dissolve was denied.” –Erika M.

In tying this back to the previous section of the Pursell reading I thought it was interesting seeing all of the ramifications of even the threat of dam-breaking being discussed in a court of law. The descriptions of the 'what-ifs' found on page 62 are quite in-depth and consider not only the losses that would be experienced by the Winnipisiogee Lake Company but also by the other residents surrounding the river bed. It was also interesting to see that the case was ruled in favor of the plaintiffs rather than the defendant showing that companies with larger pockets and better legal support can quite easily win a legal battle over even the hypothetical threat of harm coming to one of their assets. -Cameron Wills

The Great Falls v. James Worster was a court case between the Great Falls Manufacturing Company, with the company itself having 5 cotton mills and the Corporation duly establishing a law that the petitioners use, occupy, and improve the mills and machinery in manufacturing cotton into cloth to enable them profitably and success. “Using the mills and machinery for that purpose is necessary for said petitioners to use the water that runs into Salmon Fall River to drive the machinery in the mills” (p. 64) – Hunter Dykhuis

Lt. Col. Talcott describes the dissatisfaction of the workers as expendable. He says how there are more men than necessary to do the work, and their shifts time are favorable. He also goes on to further breakdown their claims and attempt to dismantle their requests. Talcott says, “ have been paid for a ‘chance’ to blow & strike in the Smithy” (154) there is a supposed honor to even be able to work for the company and that many more should be so honored to even have the chance to work there. It’s a precursor to the labor union movements where employers and those who wanted to defend them would critique those workers who have poor conditions and make them feel guilty for complaining or not feeling gratitude for being employed. - John Liberty

This part of the reading is a correspondence between H.K. Craig and an unnamed “Sir,” as well as a letter from Lt. Col. Talcott to Jno. C Spencer, Ord Office addressing the ways labor and newer technology change how the Armory functions. As the Harper’s Ferry Armory was located in a strategic place to supply troops very quickly. The letters talk about how working in the armory should change based on the fact that it now takes less hours to make more weapons thanks to new machinery that “requires little skill to operate” (154). There are too many workers and Talcott attempts to negotiate new terms for working in the Armory to better suit how everything operates such as enforcing fixed hours instead of paying employees by piece.-Meghan McDonagh

Amidst the caulker riots in Baltimore of 1836, Frederick Douglass - who was a national leader of the abolitionist movement, was violently beaten by white ship carpenters. These white-workers presumably belonged to one of the white, working-class gangs of the 19th century - such as the Tigers, who were on strike against black-labor competition.

In what manner did the caulker riots demonstrate how institutional structures of power in politics and at the workplace impact job-related racial conflict? How prevalent is this issue today among the growing racial tensions within our political climate? (–Nate Stringer)

Frederick Douglass was severely beaten by white ship carpenters in 1835. He knew that the best decision he could make would be to run away. This is exactly what he did. It says in the text “ I found my only chance for life was in flight. I succeeded in getting away without an additional blow, and barely so; for to strike a white man is death by Lynch law,-and that was the law in Mr. Gardner's ship-yard; nor is there much of any other out of Mr. Gardner's ship-yard” (Frederick Douglass). So he fled back home and told his master everything that happened. Luckily his master was not as harsh as others would have been. Douglass made the correct decision to flee the situation that day. If he did not then he would have not made as big of a mark on the world as he did. (– Erin Madden)

In Baltimore, around 1836, Frederick Douglass was physically harmed by white ship carpenters. He was brutally beaten while working for William Gardner, who built ships in Fell’s Point. After this fight with the white men, Douglass ran away and ended up at Walter Price’s shipyard. If Douglass stayed in Gardner’s shipyard, he could have been lynched for fighting with the men. If Douglass hadn’t fled, his movements and moments would have never happened, and things would be very different without his knowledge and leadership. – Reilly Miller

Why were men proud to have been paper makers, but not makers of other domestic products? This is the first I’ve seen men write about how proud they are of their work that isn’t related to agriculture, war, politics, or business. Was it pay? Relation to currency and bank note production? Or simply the mention of a lack of frequent supervision, allowing themselves to self-manage and feel in control? If the latter is true, why weren’t other industries initially operated in the same way to allow white men a better sense of control over various manufacturing processes? - Dillyn Scott

I would have thought that the emergence of mechanization would worsen relationships between workers and owners, but Smith and Clancey say otherwise. While early mechanization was dangerous and sometimes difficult to upkeep, it still eased (at least a part) of the production process. This leads me to think that workers, as individuals operating machinery instead of utilizing artisan skills, would become less valuable therefore creating a strained relationship between them and the owner, but instead the hierarchy of the workplace sort of disintegrated. Manliness and manhood of both parties seemed to be reinforced. Going even further against my original thought, mechanization tied highly to worker's pride. I thought that as the worker distances themselves from the production (through operating machinery instead of working by hand) that the sense of pride connected to the product would diminish but the authors cite accounts of men bragging about their proficiency at managing certain levels of machinery more than hand-craft skills. -K.Eastridge

Mechanization had an impact on the paper industry like McGraw tries to point out. Specialization begins to grow and people tend to focus on special pieces of the task. Places started to subdivide each task which helped grow the specialization. In addition, it impacted the health and the pace of the industry, but we also start to see a gap in gender. Men's work tended to become more mechanized, while women's work did not. Men's work required a lot more strength and long training. -Haley Denehy