Search

The article presents bibliography of some papers on the labor history of the U.S. for 1969 published in various periodicals. Some of these papers include "Labor History: Sources and Perspectives," by Richard C. Berner published in the Pacific Northwest Quarterly, "Annual Bibliography of Periodical Articles on American Labor History: 1967" by Michael Brook published in Labor History, "Three Problems for the Labor Historian," by Nuala McGann Drescher published in the Pacific Northwest Quarterly, "Manuscript Sources in the Library of Congress for a Study of Labor History," by Paul T. Heifron published in the Labor History, "Listening to the Inarticulate: William Dream and the Loyalties of American Revolutionary Seamen in British Prisons," by Jesse Lemisch published in the Journal of Social History, "The Educational Philosophy and Practices of Robert Owen: Educational Iconoclast of the 19th Century," by Alfred Lightfoot and "Salvation in the Slums: Evangelical Social Welfare Work, 1865-1920," by Norris Alden Magnuson.

The article presents a bibliography of periodicals and papers on the history of the American labor. According to the author the scope of this bibliography is, in fact, somewhat narrower than the title suggests, as it has been confined, with one or two exceptions, to learned periodicals. The list of papers on the period of labor development in the U. S. includes "Labor and the Federal Government: 1850-1933," by Albert A. Blum, , "Labor and the Radical Republicans: a Study of the Revival of the American Labor Movement, 1864-1868," by David Montgomery, "Cooperative Community in the North: Brigham City, Utah," by Leonard J. Arrington, "The Experimental Utopia in America," by Maren Lockwood, "The Failure of the Movement by the Unemployed for Public `Works in 1873," by Herbert G. Gutman, "Economic Growth and the Opportunities of Minorities: an Analysis of Changes in the Employment of Negroes and Women," by Dale Leroy Hiestand, and "The Poles and Anthracite Unions in Pennsylvania," by Victor R. Greene.

The article comments on the progressive and the working class vote in California. Progressivism was a middle class movement, and while its leaders might strive to remedy the crassest abuses of industrial society, they were as fearful of concentrated labor power as of unregulated monopoly capitalism. In their zeal for moral reform and efficiency, they were often thrown into conflict with labor and immigrant-dominated political machines in cities. The interpretation that represents Progressivism as a political move by a disaffected middle class, as reformers frightened by the power of monopolistic corporations and fearful of organized labor, rests upon inferences drawn from public statements and, in a few instances, private thoughts of a leadership elite. Few attempts have been made to examine the other side of the coin and determine the response of labor leaders and the labor press. The conclusion that Progressivism was a middle-class movement has not been adequately tested against the voting records of metropolitan areas. It is the hypothesis of this paper that leaders of organized labor in California strongly endorsed Progressivism and that, though Progressivism was originally sustained by middle- and upper-class voters.

To argue that more needs to and can be known about black artisans and laborers in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and especially in the South. The Montgomery workingmen have a full ticket in the field for the coming city election, and there is nothing under heaven to hinder them from succeeding if they but stand firm in the faith. The people of Alabama are tired of ring rule. The Democratic papers call the workingmen the riff-raff and fag ends of society. The miners have experienced poverty to such a degree, and for such a length of time, that they and their families do not shudder at it, but look it squarely in the face, like little men. The miners in Alabama have no organization to protect their interests or advocate their cause, and they are in a different position from any mining locality in the United States. All capitalists employing labor in this part of the country have two sorts of labor, and some of them three sorts of labor.

The article presents an extract from a private diary kept by an intelligent and scholarly young carpenter living in New England and New York from September 1820 to May 1827. Carpenters having frequently discussed upon the impropriety of working so many hours during the longest days in summer, for a day's work and on the necessity and expediency of limiting the number of hours for a day's work, thereby reducing it to a regular system whereby every mechanick might be enabled to work the exact specified time for his employer and yet have some leisure time to regulate and make such arrangements in his affairs as are indispensably necessary. The first step taken to effect this was notice given in the public papers that a meeting of the journeymen carpenters would be held at Concert Hall, on April 12, 1825 and solicited punctual attendance. This notice was given about ten days previous to the proposed meeting. Five or six days before the meeting about sixty or seventy of the above named met to consult what measures to adopt at the general meeting and make such arrangements for the same as might be thought proper.