Domestic Manufactures

January 23

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Post-Boy (January 23, 1775).

“This Paper, has been printed with ink manufactured by said Geyer, for several Months past.”

When the Continental Association went into effect, colonizers looked to “domestic manufactures” or goods produced in the colonies as alternatives to imports.  The eighth article of that nonimportation, nonconsumption, and nonexportation agreement even stated that “we will, on our several Stations, encourage Frugality, Economy, and Industry; and promote Agriculture, Arts and the Manufactures of this Country.”  Henry Christian Geyer did just that in an advertisement that appeared in the January 23, 1775, edition of the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Post-Boy.  He announced that he “manufactured” printing ink “in large or small Quantities, at his Shop near Liberty-Tree South-End of Boston.”  Devoting such “Industry” to the “Manufactures of this Country” testified to Geyer’s support of the American cause; noting the proximity of his shop and such an important symbol underscored his patriotism.

Yet Geyer had more to say about the matter.  He proclaimed to “the Public” that “the Royal American Magazine, was not printed with his Ink.”  His advertisement gave no indication why he singled out the Royal American Magazine and not any of the newspapers published in Boston or any of the city’s printing offices.  After all, if he had captured the entire market (except for the Royal American Magazine) then he had less need to place an advertisement.  He chose to shame Joseph Greenleaf, the publisher of the Royal American Magazine, for not purchasing his product, perhaps intending to bully him into buying Geyer’s printing ink or perhaps settling some score by embarrassing him in a public forum.

Geyer’s advertisement concluded with a nota bene that clarified that “This Paper, has been printed with Ink manufactured by said Geyer, for several Months past.”  Geyer may have written the nota bene himself, presenting a testimonial of the quality of the ink that readers could assess for themselves as they held the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Post-Boy in their hands.  Alternately, Nathaniel Mills and John Hicks, the printers of the newspaper, could have added the nota beneon their own as a means of demonstrating that they supported domestic manufactures even before the Continental Association went into effect.

December 12

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

New-York Gazette and Weekly Mercury (December 12, 1774).

“He will meet with due encouragement … by every real friend to American manufactures.”

Nicholas Cox, a hatter, made several appeals to consumers in his advertisement in the December 12, 1774, edition of the New-York Gazette and Weekly Mercury.  He commenced with a standard expression of gratitude for “the encouragement he had met with from the respectable publick since he commenc’d business.”  Many purveyors of goods and services did so in their advertisements, signaling to readers that other consumers already considered them worthy of their business.  It was a familiar means of bolstering an advertiser’s reputation.

The hatter also incorporated commentary specific to his trade, proclaiming that he “manufactures the new invented and greatly approved of CAP-HATS.”  For those unaware of this innovation, eh explained that by “outward appearance they are entirely like other hats, having only the addition of a cap fix’d in the bowl, which can be drawn out occasionally.”  In such instances, it “buttons under the chin, keeping the neck and ears entirely free from rain or snow.”  Cox marketed this new style, a very practical element, as “so very necessary for all those whose business exposes them to the inclemency of the weather.”  According to Kate Haulman, colonizers debated whether they should carry umbrellas, “stylistic spoils of empire hailing from India,” in the 1760s and 1770s.  “Some regarded umbrellas as ridiculous and frivolous,” she notes, “serving no purpose that a good hat could not supply.”[1]  Cox produced and sold such hats for men of business who sought to eschew the effeminacy and luxury associated with umbrellas.

His next appeal made an even more explicitly political argument to prospective customers.  He made “the best black and white superfine FELT and WOOL HATS,” like the tricorne hat depicted in the woodcut that adorned his advertisement.  Cox asserted that patriotic consumers had a duty to support his business when they made choices about where to acquire their hats.  He expressed confidence that he “will meet with due encouragement at this spirited time, by every real friend to American manufactures.”  The Continental Association, a boycott of British goods adopted in response to the Coercive Acts, had recently gone into effect.  Cox offered an alternative to colonizers who desired to acquire hats yet wished to remain patriotically correct, either according to their own principles or at least to avoid the ire of others who observed the purchases they made.  Furthermore, his customers did not have sacrifice quality for principles.  The hatter pledged that “he will warrant [his hats] to be far superior to the best imported from England.” That being the case, the crown that appeared above the tricorne hat at the top of his advertisement may have testified to the superior quality of his hats, a general sense of pride in being part of the British Empire, or reverence for the monarch whom many colonizers still hoped would intervene on their behalf in their altercation with Parliament.

In addition to those appeals, Cox included two more common marketing strategies.  He promised a “[g]reat abatement … to those who take a quantity at a time.”  In other words, he gave discounts for buying multiple hats, both for consumers and for retailers who intended to sell them in their own shops.  He also provided a free ancillary service: “Customers hats brush’d at all times, gratis.”  Cox saw to the care and maintenance of the hats he made and sold long after the time of purchase.  He cultivated relationships with customers by encouraging them to return to his shop for assistance in keeping their hats in good order.  Overall, Cox resorted to a variety of familiar and specific appeals when advertising his hats, distinguishing him from competitors who did not put as much effort into marketing their wares.

**********

[1] Kate Haulman, “Fashion and the Culture Wars of Revolutionary Philadelphia,” William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 62, no 4 (October 2005): 632.

December 7

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Pennsylvania Journal (December 7, 1774).

“White and Green Glass Ware; Such as are usually imported from Great-Britain.”

A headline in capital letters and a large font proclaimed, “AMERICAN GLASS.”  In a secondary headline composed of font of the same size, John Elliott and Company promoted “White and Green Glass Ware” that they produced ay their “GLASS HOUSE” near Philadelphia.  That advertisement happened to appear in the December 7, 1774, edition of the Pennsylvania Journal, the first issue published since the Continental Association went into effect on December 1.  Throughout the colonies, retailers and consumers adopted that boycott of goods imported from Britain, some enthusiastically and some under pressure.  They hoped that measure would help convince Parliament to repeal the Coercive Acts passed in retaliation for the Boston Tea Party.

Ever since the boycotts inspired by the Stamp Act nearly a decade earlier, supporters of the American cause emphasized the importance of “domestic manufactures” or goods produced in the colonies.  Such products offered an alternative to imported wares while also bolstering local economies and creating jobs.  The Continental Association had the potential to disrupt consumption practice, but it also presented opportunities for American entrepreneurs, including Elliott and Company.

In their advertisement, the proprietors of the Glass House reported that they had “procured a sett of good Workmen” and the glassworks were “in blast.”  That meant that the public “may be supplied with most kinds of White and Green Glass Ware; Such as are usually imported from Great-Britain.”  Prospective customers did not need to worry about the quality or cost of this alternative.  Elliott and Company offered assurances that they produced glassware “in a neat manner, and at moderate prices.”  In their appeal to “the PUBLIC,” Elliott and Company did not address consumers alone.  They also hoped to entice retailers, noting that “Orders from store-keepers and others, both of town and country will be executed with care and dispatch.”  They hoped these various appeals would “induce the friends of their country, and their own interest, to promote the undertaking.”  It was a win-win-win situation for the protest against Parliament, for customers, and for Elliott and Company.

November 10

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Virginia Gazette [Pinkney] (November 10, 1774).

“A WOOLEN and WORSTED MANUFACTORY … American manufactures.”

As John Pinkney published updates from the First Continental Congress in the Virginia Gazette in November 1774, Elisha White and Robert White ran an advertisement to announce that they were “engaged in the erection of a WOOLLEN and WORSTED MANUFACTORY” that they anticipated would meet with great success.  They had already been “encouraged by many of the most patriotic gentlemen of the country,” yet sought even greater support for “so beneficial an undertaking” among the public.  In other words, they sought investors to defray the costs of this endeavor, addressing those “who may incline to promote American manufactures” as alternatives to goods imported from Britain.  The Whites had already gone to some expense, recruiting “a number of the best workmen,” though they still needed to “compleat the works, and procure the necessary utensils.”  Their enterprise would have even greater urgency as colonizers learned more about the Continental Association, a nonimportation pact, adopted by the First Continental Congress.

To raise the necessary funds to make their “MANUFACTORY” viable, the Whites established a subscription and designated local agents in several towns who collected the money on their behalf.  They also outlined their scheme for repaying these loans: “Half the price of our work to be received in cash, the other half, from time to time, is to be placed to the credit of our generous benefactors, till the whole is repaid.”  In case that seemed like too much of a gamble, the Whites appended a note from some of those “most patriotic gentlemen” to offer assurances.  Samuel Meredith, Barrett White, John Stark, and Richard Chapman pledged that they “will be responsible to the gentlemen who have or may subscribe for the encouragement of Elisha and Robert White’s WOOLLEN MANUFACTORY.”  If the project did not succeed, those four men “shall return the subscribers their money.”  That promise reflected their confidence in the Whites’ ability to “carry on their business with life and spirit” while simultaneously underscoring that civic duty called for supporting the “MANUFACTORY” through investing in it and, eventually, purchasing the goods produced there.  Political principles guided participation in both production and consumption of “American manufactures” as the imperial crisis intensified in 1774.

November 7

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Newport Mercury (November 7, 1774).

“American SNUFF … equal to any imported from Great-Britain.”

George Lawton and Robert Lawton hoped that their marketing strategy would help them to edge out the competition when they advertised “American SNUFF” in the November 7, 1774, edition of the Newport Mercury.  They explained that the product they sold was “MANUFACTURED in Pennsylvania, and esteemed there equal to any imported from Great-Britain.”  Apparently, it was not yet familiar to consumers in Rhode Island, but the Lawtons hoped that the enthusiasm for the snuff in another colony would convince local customers to give it a try.  Furthermore, they suggested that patriotic consumers had a duty to select this “American SNUFF” and support domestic manufactures over imported alternatives.  “[I]t is hoped,” the Lawtons declared, “that the public spirit of this colony will not be wanting to promote the use of this article, if on trial it should be found to merit it.”  They allowed for some wiggle room, leaving it to consumers to assess the quality of the snuff for themselves, yet proposed that those who did consider it “equal to any imported from Great Britain” should shift their allegiance to the product from the colonies.

Elsewhere on the same page, John Bell a shopkeeper who frequently advertised in the Newport Mercury, hawked “ENGLISH and INDIA GOODS” that he sold “as cheap as can be bought in any shop in AMERICA.”  Following a catalog of some of his inventory, he concluded with a separate entry for “Best Tilloch’s snuff, just imported from Glasgow.”  That city was well known for the quality of the tobacco products made there and then shipped to consumers on both sides of the Atlantic.  Bell expected that customers in Newport recognized “Tilloch’s snuff” as a familiar brand, not an unreasonable supposition considering that other entrepreneurs also advertised that product.  Bell’s effort to market imported snuff did not have the same visual appeal as the advertisement placed by the Lawtons.  Their notice featured “American SNUFF” as a headline in a larger font, calling attention to both the product and the argument about the political principles associated with it at a time that many colonizers advocated for boycotts of British goods as a means of resisting the Coercive Acts passed by Parliament earlier in the year.  They seemingly considered this strategy effective, resorting to it once again after using it several months earlier.

August 18

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Weekly News-Letter (August 11, 1774).

“Render this Country an essential Service, by establishing a Manufacture necessary to its Prosperity.”

Abraham Cornish had been in business and advertising long enough by the late summer of 1774 that he expected colonizers to be familiar with his brand of “CORNISH’s New-England Cod-Fish HOOKS.”  He deployed the name of his product as a headline for his advertisement in the August 18 edition of the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Weekly News-Letter.  Still, for those who needed a refresher or a bit more encouragement to purchase his fishhooks, he provided more information about why those from “his Manufactory” were superior to others.  That they were made in America was central to his marketing efforts.

The savvy entrepreneur had recently moved from “the North-End of Boston, to the Upper Part of Charlestown,” where he continued to make fishhooks “warranted of the best Quality.”  He called on “all concerned in the Fishery” to “favor him with their Custom, as they will thereby promote their own private Interest, and render this Country an essential Service, by establishing a Manufacture necessary to its Prosperity.”  It was a win-win-win situation for “the American Fishery,” the manufacturer, and all colonizers at a time that the political crisis intensified due to the imposition of the Coercive Acts in retaliation for the Boston Tea Party.  Those whose livelihood depended on fishing could acquire equipment “found much Superior to any imported, Cornish could maintain or even expand his business, and the colonies would benefit from “domestic manufactures” that both supported a local industry and directly contributed to the local economy.  Ever since the boycotts inspired by the Stamp Act nearly a decade earlier, many colonizers had advocated for producing more “domestic manufactures” as a means of reducing their reliance on imported goods.  Doing so also served as political leverage in the struggles with Parliament.  Such plans placed obligations on both artisans and tradespeople to produce goods and consumers to purchase those goods instead of imported items.  Like many other producers of “domestic manufactures,” Cornish assured prospective customers that they did not have to sacrifice quality, decalaring that his fishhooks were “made of the best Wire only” and “better shap’d to take Fish.”  He proclaimed that they were “universally approv’d,” having gone into even greater detail in a previous advertisement about how “Fishermen who made Trial of his Hooks … found them … superior to those imported from England.”  Cornish devised a “Buy American” campaign before the colonies declared independence.

July 20

Carl Robert Keyes Slavery Adverts 250 Project , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Pennsylvania Gazette (July 20, 1774).

“Patterns of the different prints may be seen at the Manufactory.”

John Hewson joined the chorus of entrepreneurs promoting “domestic manufactures” or goods produced in the colonies as an alternative to imported goods when he announced that his “CALICOE PRINTING MANUFACTORY, and BLEACH-YARD, is just opened” on the outskirts of Philadelphia.  As the imperial crisis intensified, it became more important than ever for producers and consumers in the colonies to unite in opposition to the “oppressive and arbitrary yoke” of a “corrupt and designing Ministry.”  That was how an editorial addressed “To the INHABITANTS of the different COLONIES IN AMERICA” described current events.  The following pages of the July 20, 1774, edition of the Pennsylvania Gazette featured a “SUMMARY of Monday’s DEBATES on the BOSTON BILLS” (or the Coercive Acts), “RESOLUTIONS unanimously entered into by the Inhabitants of SOUTH-CAROLINA, at a General Meeting, held at Charles-Town,” and updates from other colonies about how they intended to respond to the Boston Port Act.

That made it an opportune time for Hewson to promote his new enterprise, one that he assured consumers rivaled in quality his competitors on the other side of the Atlantic.  At “considerable expence,” he had “imported prints from London, and completed works for carrying on [his] business to perfection.”  In addition, he possessed valuable experience, having been “brought up regularly to the business, at Bromley-Hall, near London, one of the most considerable Manufactories and Bleach-yards in England.”  Realizing that prospective customers may have been skeptical of his claims, Hewson offered a guarantee: “his work shall be equal in colour, and will stand washing, as well as any imported from London or elsewhere, otherwise will require no pay.”  Customers had nothing to lose if Hewson did not charge for work that they found unsatisfactory.  Furthermore, he charged reasonable prices for textile printing, though the extensive combinations of colors “renders his publishing the prices of printing impossible.”  Hewson had a variety of patterns for customers to order.  They could examine samples “at the Manufactory” or schedule appointments for Hewson to visit them.  They could also place orders “at the Manufactory” or leave them with one of several associates “who have been pleased to encourage the work” and, in turn, endorsed the endeavor by partnering with Hewson in receiving orders.

Hewson did not directly mention the deteriorating relationship between the colonies and Britain nor proposals for new nonimportation agreements intended to harness commerce as political leverage.  That hardly seemed necessary considering that readers almost certainly had current events in mind as they perused newspaper advertisements.  Hewson did not need to belabor the political advantages of supporting his “CALICOE PRINTING MANUFACTORY” when news items and editorials already did that work.

July 14

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Rivington’s New-York Gazetteer (July 14, 1774).

“At this critical and alarming juncture … set up the business of REED-MAKING.”

Nathaniel Pike testified that he wished to do his part to support the American cause in an advertisement in the July 14, 1774, edition of Rivington’s New-York Gazetteer.  He informed the public that he was “willing to assist in promoting manufacturers in America, (especially at this critical and alarming juncture)” and, accordingly, “lately set up the business of REED-MAKING.”  Eighteenth-century readers familiar with weaving knew that reeds were the “part of a loom consisting of a set of evenly spaced wires known as dents (originally slender pieces of reed or cane) fastened between two parallel horizontal bars used for separating, or determining the spacing between, the warp threads, and for beating the weft into place.”[1]  Pike pledged that “weavers and others, both in town and country, may be supplied with reeds of all kinds, as neat and good as any imported.”

Although Pike did not name the Boston Port Act or any of the other Coercive Acts passed by Parliament in retaliation for the Boston Tea Party, readers certainly understood the context for his reference to “this critical and alarming juncture.”  From New England to Georgia, colonizers discussed how to respond, many of them advocating for a new round of nonimportation agreements like the ones enacted in response to the Stamp Act and the duties imposed on certain goods in the Townshend Acts.  That meant that “domestic manufactures” or goods produced in the colonies would become important alternatives to imported goods.  Pike offered his own product made in the colonies, those reeds that matched imported ones in quality, yet his enterprise also facilitated greater production of textiles in the colonies.  Every stage of producing cloth took on greater significance in the face of boycotting fabrics imported from England, from farmers raising sheep for their wool to women participating in spinning bees that put their patriotism on display to consumers choosing and wearing homespun cloth out of allegiance to their political principles.  By supplying weavers with reeds for their looms, Pike served a vital role in protests against the abuses perpetrated by Parliament.  He expected that current events would help in marketing his product.

**********

[1] Oxford English Dictionary, II.11.a.

July 7

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Massachusetts Spy (July 7, 1774).

“AMERICAN INK-POWDER.”

In an advertisement in the July 7, 1774, edition of the Massachusetts Gazette, Ann Norton of Boston and Samuel Norton of Hingham heralded “AMERICAN INK-POWDER” made by Samuel.  They encouraged “Gentlemen, Merchants, Attornies and others that travel” to purchase this product “found to be equal, if not superior to any imported.”  Most of the advertisement described the various qualities of the ink powder that made it better than imported alternatives.  As colonizers in Boston and other towns considered enacting nonimportation agreements to protest the Boston Port Act, entrepreneurs like the Nortons seized the opportunity to present “domestic manufactures” or goods produced in the colonies as patriotic choices for consumers.  On the same page as the Nortons’ advertisement for “AMERICAN INK-POWDER,” Philip Freeman once again ran his notice asserting that “we can manufacture enough [gloves] here, to supply the whole Continent” and recommending that “the importation of this article at least will be totally stopped” during such “threatning” times.

Both advertisements ran in a newspaper that featured a new addition to its masthead: a snake in several segments facing a dragon.  The words “JOIN OR DIE” appeared above the snake and abbreviations for New England and other colonies accompanied each segment.  Readers understood that the snake represented the colonies and the dragon represented Great Britain.  As Isiah Thomas, the printer of the Massachusetts Spy, explained in his History of Printing in America(1810), “The head and tail of the snake were supplied with stings, for defence against the dragon, which appeared furious, and as bent on attacking the snake.”[1]  It was a more elaborate version of the “JOIN, OR DIE” emblem that ran in Benjamin Franklin’s Pennsylvania Gazette twenty years earlier and the “UNITE OR DIE” emblem added to the masthead of the New-York Journal just two weeks earlier.  With this image, Thomas made the threat to American liberty explicit with the addition of the dragon.  That “political device,” as Thomas called it, joined a quotation from Joseph Addison’s Cato that had been part of the masthead for many months: “DO THOU Great LIBERTY inspire our Souls – And make our Lives in THY Possession happy – Or, our Deaths glorious in THY just Defence.”  An assertion that the Massachusetts Spy was “Open to ALL Parties, but Influenced by None” disappeared from the masthead.  The combination of the quotation from Cato and the “political device” made the editorial perspective of the newspaper clear.  Thomas ceased publishing the Massachusetts Spy in Boston and left the city in April 1775 and soon after established the Massachusetts Spy; or, American Oracle of Liberty in Worcester.  Throughout the remainder of the newspaper’s publication in Boston, the snake defending itself against the dragon was part of the masthead, setting the tone for all the news, editorials, and advertisements that appeared below.

Massachusetts Spy (July 7, 1774).

**********

[1] Isaiah Thomas, The History of Printing in America: With a Biography of Printers and an Account of Newspapers (1810; New York: Weathervane Books, 1970), 273.

June 16

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Massachusetts Spy (June 16, 1774).

“It is hoped therefore, that the importation of this article at least will be totally stopped.”

Current events informed Philip Freeman’s marketing strategy as he attempted to sell gloves in the summer of 1774.  As colonizers from New England to Georgia discussed how to respond to Parliament closing Boston Harbor and other legislation passed following the Boston Tea Party, many proposed a new round of nonimportation agreements.  American merchants previously participated in boycotts to protest the Stamp Act and duties on several commodities imposed in the Townshend Acts, believing that disruptions to commerce served as an effective political tool.  Parliament relented, repealing the Stamp Act and duties on glass, lead, paint, and paper (but doubled down on tea with a new Tea Act in 1773).  A variety of other factors, including petitions and popular protests, played a role, so nonimportation agreements may not have had as much of an influence as intended.  Still, colonizers believed that boycotting goods imported from Britain effectively achieved their political goals.

Freeman believed that was the case and encouraged prospective customers of its veracity.  “As times are threatning,” he declared, “it behoves one and all to go into the most frugal methods to encourage our own Manufactures.”  He recognized “a great consumption of Gloves in this large Country,” yet proposed that “we can manufacture enough here, to supply the whole Continent.”  Such industry would have multiple benefits: it “will employ our own people, and keep a large sum of Money here, which is annually sent to England for Gloves.”  Furthermore, Freeman asserted that the gloves he made “are better and cheaper than can be imported from England.”  Not willing to wait for any sort of official nonimportation agreement enacted in Boston or throughout the colony or in cooperation with other colonies, Freeman implored that “the importation of this article at least will be totally stopped.”  In common cause, Freeman and his competitors in the colonies could meet demand without having to resort to imported gloves.  He did not direct his advertisement to consumers but rather the “Merchants and Shop-keepers” that he could supply with several different kinds of gloves “on the most reasonable terms.”  Working in concert, Freeman envisioned that glovemakers, retailers, and consumers could participate in politics via the decisions they made about production, consumption, and importing goods, starting immediately and informally with gloves and perhaps extending to other items through formal agreements as colonizers continued to organize in opposition to the Boston Port Act.