The Craft's flight to freedom
Ellen Smith Craft was born in Clinton, Georgia in 1826. Her father, Colonel James Smith, was white and was the owner of her mother, Maria. Maria was mulatto or mixed-race. Ellen was very fair skinned and often mistaken for being Caucasian. Ellen was separated from her mother at the age of eleven and given to Dr. Robert Collins. This was a wedding present for Dr. Collins who married Colonel Smith's daughter, Eliza. This was Ellen's white half-sister.It was here at her new master’s home in Macon, Georgia that Ellen meet William.William and Ellen married in 1846. Their marriage was not seen as legal or binding in the southern states. They weren't able to live together due to having different masters. They began to save their money and develop a plan to escape.Ellen disguised herself as a white gentleman traveling with his slave, William, to Philadelphia for medical treatment. Ellen was illiterate but skirted this issue by putting her right arm in a sling. This overtly injured arm could then be used as an excuse for not being able to write. To hide her feminine facial features she wore a poultice on her face. This bandage also discouraged conversations with strangers. With the plan in place they asked their masters for a few days to visit friends and families. It took them only four days to reach a Quaker farm near Philadelphia.
Justin
After arriving in Philadelphia on December 25th, 1848 William and Ellen spent 3 weeks with the Iven’s family. The Craft’s then decided to move to Boston, Massachusetts knowing they would be safer there then in Philadelphia. Once in Boston they were assisted by abolitionists William Lloyd Garrison, Theodore Parker, William Welles Brown (a fugitive slave) and Vigilance Committee of Boston. Their daring escape was the topic in abolitionist discussion and Brown arranged for the Craft’s to make appearances at their meetings in which an admission fee was charged. This admission fee was given to William and Ellen to help them to settle in Boston in a free black community on Beacon Hill. They both became involved with the abolitionist movement. In Boston, William having been apprenticed as a cabinetmaker by his former master continued this line of work and also started a furniture shop. Ellen took up work sewing, having been a household servant and familiar with needlepoint developed her skills and assisted William in upholstery of furniture in his shop. The Crafts spent two years in Boston in relative harmony, they had their marriage sanctioned by a Christian church and settled down to a life of freedom and lived comfortably.
Justin/Amy
During this time congress was attempting to hold the union together, California and Texas were territories recently acquired and were petitioning to join the union as free states. The slave states wishing to keep a balance between free and slave states were in an uproar over this. They would lose the balance of representatives in congress if this occurred. In order to appease the slave states the Compromise of 1850 was proposed by Henry Clay and on January 29th, 1950 the Fugitive Slave Act was enacted. The Fugitive Slave law allowed slave owners to recover escaped slaves in the free states and required authorities in the free states to assist in enforcing the law. Furthermore, both federal marshals and private citizens were mandated to help capture these fugitive slaves. While this compromise kept the Union intact it was the end of freedom to blacks living in the north.
Amy/Kasey
Shortly after the Fugitive Slave Act was enacted the Craft’s learned two slave catchers, Willis Hughes and John Knight, were dispatched by Ellen's prior owner, Dr. Collins, to Boston to bring her back down south. William and Ellen decide to go to England not feeling that Canada would be safe. Abolitionists helped them to escape Boston. The authorities and slave catchers would be watching the ports so it was necessary for them to flee to Portland, Maine. In Portland they stayed with Daniel Oliver until leaving for St. John, New Brunswick. From St. John’s they took a steamer to Windsor Nova Scotia and then a coach to Halifax, Nova Scotia. They were the subject of racism and prejudice during flight from America but finally reached England.
Though they stayed in England until after the end of the Civil War, they worked passionately on their cause. During their time in England, they had four children and developed a business. William financed and went on several trips to Africa to teach Christianity and promote agriculture and trade. However, after these mostly unsuccessful trips, the Craft’s were left in financial ruin. It was at this time that they felt it best to return Stateside. The year was 1869.
Kasey/Amy
The Craft’s were left in financial trouble after William's endeavors in Africa (teaching Christianity and promoting trade). They decided to return to America in 1869. At this point, the Civil War had ended and they purchased a plantation, Hickory Hill, in Savannah, Georgia. Their vision was to have a cooperative farm for freed slaves, but in 1870, a group of angry (white) people burned the farm to the ground, as well as the crops. A year later, they leased yet another farm, this time outside Savannah. Woodville became a cooperative farm and a school for blacks.Financial troubles, hostility and other factors followed the Craft's for the rest of their lives. In 1891, Ellen passed away and was buried, at her request, under a tree on their land. Following the passing of his wife, William relocated to Charleston, South Carolina where he later died.It should be noted that there is significantly more information available about Ellen Craft's life than her husbands. Most information regarding him is intertwined with his wife's biography.
Kasey
TIMELINE
1837 – Given as gift to the Smith family at age 11
1846 – Marries William Craft
1848 – Escapes to Boston with husband
1850 – Slave catchers attempt capture
1850 – Flees to England
1851 – Lectures across England about horrors of slavery
1852 – First child is born
1868 – Returns to U.S.
1869 – Settles in Hickory Hill, S.C.
1870 – Ku Klux Klan burns the Crafts’ cooperative farm
1873 – Purchases plantation in Georgia, opens school
1876 – White neighbors’ slander damages farm business and schoolJustin
I found a great web site that has the electronic version of William Craft's autobiography:Running a Thousand Miles for Freedom; or, the Escape of William and Ellen Craft from Slavery.
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Wilberforce / Evangelicalism
William Wilberforce was an advocate of evangelical Christianity. Evangelicalism was a movement in modern Anglo-American Protestantism. Wilberforce and his associates contributed greatly to education for the poor, the founding of the Church Missionary Society (1798) and the British and Foreign Bible Society (1803), the institution of the British ban on slave trading (1807), and the abolition of slavery (1833) in British territories. Protestantism rejected the authority of the pope and in emphasizing instead the authority of the Bible and the importance of individual faith.
Unsuccessful effort to capture the Crafts
December 6, 1850
From the Georgia Constitutionalist is an account of an unsuccessful attempt to recapture fugitive slaves from Boston. It is written by Willis H. Hughes, from Macon, dated Nov. 21, 1850, and is addressed to “fellow citizens”. The fugitive is named as “Bill”, but it becomes clear it is William Craft. Hughes recounts the ways in various officials in Boston avoided assisting him by delays, postponements, jurisdictional disputes, and even at one time when he was arrested for slandering Ellen Crafts, and held to bail for $20,000. He indicates that he has leaned that the Crafts had “positively left for England”. Hughes concludes that he “went to Boston as an agent to execute a lawful trust, thinking I should be protected and assisted by the laws of my country. But, on the contrary, from the first, the laws of the country, instead of a protection, were made an engine of cruelty, oppression, injustice, and abuse; so that my life was constantly endangered, and this, without the first offer of assistance from Government, national, State, or city. I feel that every man who has a Southern heart in his bosom, and would maintain the honor of his country, should sustain the Southern right cause, by every constitutional measure, until our rights are acknowledged, and justice obtained.”
A similar account is given here by John Knight, the slave Pursuer, from Macon, who had been with Mr. Hughes.
Filed in - Slaves - escaped, - Crafts - William & Ellen, 1850, * ALL ARTICLES CHRONOLOGICALLY Comments (0) Permalink
http://www.theliberatorfiles.com/category/slaves-escaped/
William and Ellen Craft were two fugitive slaves who sought refuge in Boston after escaping their master, Robert Collins of Macon, Georgia, in December 1848. Two agents for Collins, Willis H. Hughes (?-1851) and John Knight, arrived in Boston in October 1850 intending to recapture the Crafts under the new Fugitive Slave Law. The Boston Vigilance Committee and local black community took immediate action to defend the fugitives. Each time Hughes and Knight approached the Crafts, the southerners were arrested, once for slander and once for kidnapping. Large crowds of blacks besieged the agents? hotel and shadowed their movements. This harassment, coupled with thinly veiled threats against their lives delivered by the Reverend Theodore Parker, eventually unnerved Hughes and Knight and persuaded them to return to Georgia empty-handed. The Crafts soon after fled to England. Lib., 6 December 1850, 24 January 1851; R.J.M. Blackett, "Fugitive Slaves in Britain: The Odyssey of William and Ellen Craft," Journal of American Studies, 12:41-44 (April 1978); Donald Martin Jacobs, "A History of the Boston Negro from the Revolution to the Civil War" (Ph.D. diss., Boston University, 1968), 273-74.
http://americanabolitionist.liberalarts.iupui.edu/craft.htm
From the Georgia Constitutionalist is an account of an unsuccessful attempt to recapture fugitive slaves from Boston. It is written by Willis H. Hughes, from Macon, dated Nov. 21, 1850, and is addressed to “fellow citizens”. The fugitive is named as “Bill”, but it becomes clear it is William Craft. Hughes recounts the ways in various officials in Boston avoided assisting him by delays, postponements, jurisdictional disputes, and even at one time when he was arrested for slandering Ellen Crafts, and held to bail for $20,000. He indicates that he has leaned that the Crafts had “positively left for England”. Hughes concludes that he “went to Boston as an agent to execute a lawful trust, thinking I should be protected and assisted by the laws of my country. But, on the contrary, from the first, the laws of the country, instead of a protection, were made an engine of cruelty, oppression, injustice, and abuse; so that my life was constantly endangered, and this, without the first offer of assistance from Government, national, State, or city. I feel that every man who has a Southern heart in his bosom, and would maintain the honor of his country, should sustain the Southern right cause, by every constitutional measure, until our rights are acknowledged, and justice obtained.”
A similar account is given here by John Knight, the slave Pursuer, from Macon, who had been with Mr. Hughes.
Filed in - Slaves - escaped, - Crafts - William & Ellen, 1850, * ALL ARTICLES CHRONOLOGICALLY Comments (0) Permalink
http://www.theliberatorfiles.com/category/slaves-escaped/
William and Ellen Craft were two fugitive slaves who sought refuge in Boston after escaping their master, Robert Collins of Macon, Georgia, in December 1848. Two agents for Collins, Willis H. Hughes (?-1851) and John Knight, arrived in Boston in October 1850 intending to recapture the Crafts under the new Fugitive Slave Law. The Boston Vigilance Committee and local black community took immediate action to defend the fugitives. Each time Hughes and Knight approached the Crafts, the southerners were arrested, once for slander and once for kidnapping. Large crowds of blacks besieged the agents? hotel and shadowed their movements. This harassment, coupled with thinly veiled threats against their lives delivered by the Reverend Theodore Parker, eventually unnerved Hughes and Knight and persuaded them to return to Georgia empty-handed. The Crafts soon after fled to England. Lib., 6 December 1850, 24 January 1851; R.J.M. Blackett, "Fugitive Slaves in Britain: The Odyssey of William and Ellen Craft," Journal of American Studies, 12:41-44 (April 1978); Donald Martin Jacobs, "A History of the Boston Negro from the Revolution to the Civil War" (Ph.D. diss., Boston University, 1968), 273-74.
http://americanabolitionist.liberalarts.iupui.edu/craft.htm
To Fredrick Douglass,
Your story in a basic way resembles William and Ellen Crafts. Your mistreatment may have been more severe but your flight to freedom shows ingenuity. Having the papers to sail on the ship from the mysterious black seaman seems to have been your saving grace. I am surprised they did not check these better. Your decision to tour Ireland after the printing of your biography may have been prudent as your ex-owner, Hugh Auld may have attempted to recover you. Your story is memorable; it shows what can be accomplished. From beaten and whipped slave to the first African American to receive a nomination for Vise-President of the United States. I applaud an indomitable spirit!!
Mary Prince
Mary Prince
Middle Passage
The Middle Passage
The middle passage was the second leg of the triangular slave trade route between 1450 and 1860. Although slave trade was banned by the British in 1807, in America by 1808, France and Netherlands in 1815, Portugal on 1817, and Spain in 1820 illegal trade continued for some years.
Journey length and Crews
Slaves were transported from Africa to North America, South America, and the Caribbean. The average length of the journey lasted six weeks. Weather, condition of the ship and the design of the ship played a role in the length of the time taken to cross the Atlantic. The ships were generally manned with a crew of thirty. The captains of these ships were known for their brutality and crews were often treated harshly. Crews in kind were often made up of men who had been in prison or were fugitives from justice.
Conditions on Board
The conditions on board ship were unsanitary and cramped. A normal between deck levels was approximately five feet. On a slave ship these levels were cut in half by installing another deck between the two making headroom of less then thirty inches. Some ships could carry approximately three hundred slaves in this way. Usually men and women were separated. The slaves were shackled ankle to ankle with leg irons. The slaves placed below decks could not sit up, stand, or roll when sleeping. They received no bedding and the boards they lay on were unsanded. Usually one rudimentary toilet was available so the weak and sick often lay in their own urine and excrement. Ventilation was minimally provided by portholes which were boarded over during bad weather. Dysentery was common among slaves on ship. Communal bowls were used to feed slaves; they ate from these bowls using their bare hands which helped spread disease. The food at first was European in origin but after time the crews found that an indigenous African diet seemed to keep the slaves healthier. The slaves were allowed on deck for exercise once a day to keep them healthy. Exercise often involved dancing for the entertainment of the crew. Women were often allowed more freedom but were prey to the sexual advances of the crew because of this.
Mortality Rate
Ten to twenty percent of the slaves died during the Middle Voyage. An average of thirteen percent succumbed to the hazardous voyage. The majority of deaths (malnutrition and disease) occurred during the first two to three weeks of the voyage due to the forced marches to the coast and prolonged interment at the forts and factories. The slaves were not the only casualties, about one in five of the crew usually died of disease during the journey. While all deaths were not due to disease on the ship ‘Zong’ in 1781 the ships captain threw 133 slaves overboard in an attempt to collect insurance money.
Rebellions
Rebellions on board ship consisted of staving oneself to death, in this event the slave was force feed or tortured using different means to make them eat. Another way to rebel was to commit suicide; some slaves would through themselves overboard. Violent rebellions were dealt with harshly by the captain and crew. On one ship the ‘Unity’ out of Liverpool slaves rebelled five times. In one instance forty men were put in leg irons side by side, in the next the leader was shoot dead, and two women were killed as the result of a revolt on this ship. Many rebellions may have gone undocumented since slaves did not write and the only records were those from surviving ships journals.
Improvements
In 1788 Dolben’s law was enacted by the British, this law controlled the number of slaves a ship could carry. The law required a doctor be on board. The laws were not driven by humanitarian reasons but ones of profit. The doctors supervised the cleaning of the slave decks and kept the sick slaves separated from the healthy. Less crowding in the slaves ships reduced the number of slaves to sell but the death rate fell to approximately one in eighteen offsetting the reduced cargo.
Conclusion
Figures are estimated that 11,328,000 slaves were transported by the Europeans during this time period not including the years of illegal trafficking. The slaves were traded for sugar, tobacco, coffee, molasses, and rum which were then taken to Europe for sale. The Swahili term for this era of history is called ‘Maafa’ which means Holocaust or Great Disaster.
The middle passage was the second leg of the triangular slave trade route between 1450 and 1860. Although slave trade was banned by the British in 1807, in America by 1808, France and Netherlands in 1815, Portugal on 1817, and Spain in 1820 illegal trade continued for some years.
Journey length and Crews
Slaves were transported from Africa to North America, South America, and the Caribbean. The average length of the journey lasted six weeks. Weather, condition of the ship and the design of the ship played a role in the length of the time taken to cross the Atlantic. The ships were generally manned with a crew of thirty. The captains of these ships were known for their brutality and crews were often treated harshly. Crews in kind were often made up of men who had been in prison or were fugitives from justice.
Conditions on Board
The conditions on board ship were unsanitary and cramped. A normal between deck levels was approximately five feet. On a slave ship these levels were cut in half by installing another deck between the two making headroom of less then thirty inches. Some ships could carry approximately three hundred slaves in this way. Usually men and women were separated. The slaves were shackled ankle to ankle with leg irons. The slaves placed below decks could not sit up, stand, or roll when sleeping. They received no bedding and the boards they lay on were unsanded. Usually one rudimentary toilet was available so the weak and sick often lay in their own urine and excrement. Ventilation was minimally provided by portholes which were boarded over during bad weather. Dysentery was common among slaves on ship. Communal bowls were used to feed slaves; they ate from these bowls using their bare hands which helped spread disease. The food at first was European in origin but after time the crews found that an indigenous African diet seemed to keep the slaves healthier. The slaves were allowed on deck for exercise once a day to keep them healthy. Exercise often involved dancing for the entertainment of the crew. Women were often allowed more freedom but were prey to the sexual advances of the crew because of this.
Mortality Rate
Ten to twenty percent of the slaves died during the Middle Voyage. An average of thirteen percent succumbed to the hazardous voyage. The majority of deaths (malnutrition and disease) occurred during the first two to three weeks of the voyage due to the forced marches to the coast and prolonged interment at the forts and factories. The slaves were not the only casualties, about one in five of the crew usually died of disease during the journey. While all deaths were not due to disease on the ship ‘Zong’ in 1781 the ships captain threw 133 slaves overboard in an attempt to collect insurance money.
Rebellions
Rebellions on board ship consisted of staving oneself to death, in this event the slave was force feed or tortured using different means to make them eat. Another way to rebel was to commit suicide; some slaves would through themselves overboard. Violent rebellions were dealt with harshly by the captain and crew. On one ship the ‘Unity’ out of Liverpool slaves rebelled five times. In one instance forty men were put in leg irons side by side, in the next the leader was shoot dead, and two women were killed as the result of a revolt on this ship. Many rebellions may have gone undocumented since slaves did not write and the only records were those from surviving ships journals.
Improvements
In 1788 Dolben’s law was enacted by the British, this law controlled the number of slaves a ship could carry. The law required a doctor be on board. The laws were not driven by humanitarian reasons but ones of profit. The doctors supervised the cleaning of the slave decks and kept the sick slaves separated from the healthy. Less crowding in the slaves ships reduced the number of slaves to sell but the death rate fell to approximately one in eighteen offsetting the reduced cargo.
Conclusion
Figures are estimated that 11,328,000 slaves were transported by the Europeans during this time period not including the years of illegal trafficking. The slaves were traded for sugar, tobacco, coffee, molasses, and rum which were then taken to Europe for sale. The Swahili term for this era of history is called ‘Maafa’ which means Holocaust or Great Disaster.
Slave Catchers
On September 18th 1850 the United States Congress passed the Fugitive Slave Law as a compromise between the southern slave states and the northern free states. This law allowed southern slave owners to reacquire runaway slaves in the free states. The law also required authorities in the free states to assist in the return of runaways. Anyone providing food, shelter or aid to fugitive slaves were subject to a $1000.00 fine and 6 months in jail. After the Crafts escape in December of 1848 they moved to Boston until December of 1850, they learned that two slave catchers, Willis Hughes and John Knight, had been sent by their prior masters to return them to Macon, Georgia. The Crafts fled to Nova Scotia and then to England.
1. Unsuccessful effort to capture the Crafts
December 6, 1850
From the Georgia Constitutionalist is an account of an unsuccessful attempt to recapture fugitive slaves from Boston. It is written by Willis H. Hughes, from Macon, dated Nov. 21, 1850, and is addressed to “fellow citizens”. The fugitive is named as “Bill”, but it becomes clear it is William Craft. Hughes recounts the ways in various officials in Boston avoided assisting him by delays, postponements, jurisdictional disputes, and even at one time when he was arrested for slandering Ellen Crafts, and held to bail for $20,000. He indicates that he has leaned that the Crafts had “positively left for England”. Hughes concludes that he “went to Boston as an agent to execute a lawful trust, thinking I should be protected and assisted by the laws of my country. But, on the contrary, from the first, the laws of the country, instead of a protection, were made an engine of cruelty, oppression, injustice, and abuse; so that my life was constantly endangered, and this, without the first offer of assistance from Government, national, State, or city. I feel that every man who has a Southern heart in his bosom, and would maintain the honor of his country, should sustain the Southern right cause, by every constitutional measure, until our rights are acknowledged, and justice obtained.”
A similar account is given here by John Knight, the slave Pursuer, from Macon, who had been with Mr. Hughes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugitive_Slave_Law_of_1850
http://www.theliberatorfiles.com/category/crafts-william-ellen
1. Unsuccessful effort to capture the Crafts
December 6, 1850
From the Georgia Constitutionalist is an account of an unsuccessful attempt to recapture fugitive slaves from Boston. It is written by Willis H. Hughes, from Macon, dated Nov. 21, 1850, and is addressed to “fellow citizens”. The fugitive is named as “Bill”, but it becomes clear it is William Craft. Hughes recounts the ways in various officials in Boston avoided assisting him by delays, postponements, jurisdictional disputes, and even at one time when he was arrested for slandering Ellen Crafts, and held to bail for $20,000. He indicates that he has leaned that the Crafts had “positively left for England”. Hughes concludes that he “went to Boston as an agent to execute a lawful trust, thinking I should be protected and assisted by the laws of my country. But, on the contrary, from the first, the laws of the country, instead of a protection, were made an engine of cruelty, oppression, injustice, and abuse; so that my life was constantly endangered, and this, without the first offer of assistance from Government, national, State, or city. I feel that every man who has a Southern heart in his bosom, and would maintain the honor of his country, should sustain the Southern right cause, by every constitutional measure, until our rights are acknowledged, and justice obtained.”
A similar account is given here by John Knight, the slave Pursuer, from Macon, who had been with Mr. Hughes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugitive_Slave_Law_of_1850
http://www.theliberatorfiles.com/category/crafts-william-ellen
Power Loom
Power Loom - Edmund Cartwright (1743-1823)
From Mary Bellis,Your Guide to Inventors.FREE Newsletter. Sign Up Now!
Reverend Edmund Cartwright patented the power loom.
The power loom was a steam-powered, mechanically operated version of a regular loom, an invention that combined threads to make cloth.
In 1785, Edmund Cartwright patented the first power loom and set up a factory in Doncaster, England to manufacture cloth. A prolific inventor, Edmund Cartwright also invented a wool-combing machine in 1789, continued to improve his power loom, invented a steam engine that used alcohol and a machine for making rope in 1797, and aided Robert Fulton with his steamboats.
Cartwright's power loom needed to be improved upon and several inventors did just that. It was improved upon by William Horrocks, the inventor of the variable speed batton (1813) and American, Francis Cabot Lowell. The power loom became commonly used after 1820.
View Image: Power Loom When the power loom became efficient, women replaced most men as weavers in the textile factories.
Power Looms in America
The first American power loom was constructed in 1813 by a group of Boston merchants headed by Francis Cabot Lowell.
zSB(3,3)
Sponsored Links
Free Patent InformationWe Help Inventors With Prototypes, Patents & Marketing. Free Info Kit!www.InventionHome.com
Industrial RevolutionEverything to do with Industrial Revolution items.Yahoo.com
New York InventorsLargest Online Inventor Community. 30-Day Free Trial, Join Today!ideatango.com/inventor_group
The city of Lowell and other early industrial American cities grew supporting a nearby Francis Cabot Lowell's designed power loom, an amended version of the British power loom invented by Edmund Cartwright. The power loom allowed the wholesale manufacture of cloth from ginned cotton, itself a recent innovation of Eli Whitney's.
According to the Lowell National Historical Park Handbook, for the first two centuries of American history, the weaving of cloth was a cottage industry, even after the introduction of power spinning frames in 1790. Yarn produced by machines in water-powered factories was still put out for weaving on hand looms in homes. All cloths were woven in basically the same way, although weavers followed patterns to produce cloths with intricate weaves. Because the operations of a loom focus on such a small working area, its movements must be exact. And weaving, as opposed to spinning, requires a cycle of sequential steps and involves reciprocal movement as well as circular. In a power loom, movements coordinated by human hand and eye have to be replicated through the precise interaction of levers, cams, gears, and springs. For these reasons, weaving was the last step in textile production to be mechanized.
Successful power looms were in operation in England by the early 1800s, but those made in America were inadequate. Francis Cabot Lowell realized that for the United States to develop a practical power loom, it would have to borrow British technology. While visiting English textile mills, he memorized the workings of their power looms. Upon his return, he recruited master mechanic Paul Moody to help him recreate and develop what he had seen. They succeeded in adapting the British design, and the machine shop established at the Waltham mills by Lowell and Moody continued to make improvements in the loom. With the introduction of a dependable power loom, weaving could keep up with spinning, and the American textile industry was underway.
http://inventors.about.com/od/cstartinventors/a/power_loom.htm
Reverend Edmund Cartwright (1743-1823)
Edmund Cartwright was originally from Nottingham. After graduating from Oxford University in 1779, he became the rector of Goadby church, Marwood in Leicestershire. In 1784 he visited Arkwright's cotton-spinning mill. Cartwright was sure that he could develop similar technology to benefit weaving.
In 1785, he patented the first version of his power loom and set up a factory in Doncaster. He was no businessman, however, and he went bankrupt in 1793, which forced him to close his factory.
Cartwright was a prolific inventor. He patented a wool-combing machine in 1789 and a steam engine that used alcohol, as well as a machine for making rope, in 1797. He even helped the American, Robert Fulton, with his steamboat inventions.
The power loom was quickly integrated into the weaving industry. It was improved upon by William Horrocks, famous for his invention of the variable speed batton in 1813. The power loom was used alongside Crompton's Spinning Mule in many factories. Although Cartwright did not make very much money from any of his patents, in 1809 the House of Commons voted him a sum of £10000 in recognition of his contribution to the textile industry. Cartwright retired to a farm in Kent, where he spent the rest of his life improving farm machinery.
http://inventors.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=inventors&cdn=money&tm=129&gps=78_27_1020_623&f=00&su=p554.2.150.ip_&tt=2&bt=0&bts=1&zu=http%3A//www.saburchill.com/history/chapters/IR/012.html
The invention of the steam engine by James Watt in 1776 represented a major advance in the development of powered machines. It was first applied to an industrial operation - the spinning of cotton - in 1785. A new kind of work-slave it not only marked the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, but also the coming age of mass production.In the England of the 18th century five important inventions in the textile industry advanced the automation of work processes. 1) John Kay's flying shuttle in 1733 , which permitted the weaving of larger widths of cloth and significantly increased weaving speed, 2) Edmund Cartwright's power loom in 1785, which increased weaving speed still further, 3) James Hargreaves' spinning jenny in 1764, 4) Richard Arkwright's water frame and 5) Samuel Crompton's spinning mule in 1779, whereby the last three inventions improved the speed and quality of thread-spinning operations. Those developments, combined with the invention of the steam engine, in short time led to the creation of new machine-slaves and the mechanization of the production of most major goods, such as iron, paper, leather, glass and bricks.Large-scale machine production was soon applied in many manufacturing sectors and resulted in a reduction of production costs. Yet the widespread use of the novel work-slaves also led to new demands concerning the work force's qualifications. The utilization of machines enabled a differentiated kind of division of labor and eventuated in a (further) specialization of skills. While before many goods were produced by skilled craftsmen the use of modern machinery increased the demand for semiskilled and unskilled workers. Also, the nature of the work process altered from one mainly dependent on physical power to one primarily dominated by technology and an increasing proportion of the labor force employed to operate machines.
http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611663/100438659368/?opmode=history
The spinning jenny is a multi-spool spinning wheel. It was invented circa 1764 by James Hargreaves in Stanhill, near Blackburn, Lancashire in the north west of England (although Thomas Highs is another candidate identified as the inventor). The device dramatically reduced the amount of work needed to produce yarn, with a single worker able to work eight or more spools at once.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinning_jenny
The water frame is the name given to the spinning frame, when water power was used to drive it. Both are credited to Richard Arkwright who patented and exploited the technology. It was based on an invention by Thomas Highs and the patent was later overturned. John Kay, a clock maker and mechanic who helped Highs build the spinning frame, sold the design to Arkwright (for what might be considered a derisory sum). It was Arkwright, however, who made the system work, realising that account had to be taken of the fibre lengths in the batch being spun.
The water frame is derived from the use of a water wheel to drive a number of spinning frames. The water wheel provided more power to the spinning frame than human operators, reducing the amount of human labor needed and increasing the spindle count dramatically. However, unlike the spinning jenny, the water frame could only spin one thread at a time until Samuel Crompton combined the two inventions into his spinning mule in 1779. However the water frame could be assembled with hundreds of spinning heads in a single building and was easy to operate.
In 1771 Arkwright installed the water frame in his cotton mill at Cromford, Derbyshire, on the River Derwent, creating one of the first factories that was specifically built to house machinery rather than just bringing workers together. He is considered an innovator as he combined water power,the water frame and machine factories.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_frame
The spinning mule was created in 1779 by Samuel Crompton. It was a combination of the water frame (created by Thomas Highs, initially falsely attributed to Richard Arkwright) and the spinning jenny (created by either John Kay or by James Hargreaves; sources differ). In short, it created high quality textiles, in a short amount of time.
Before cloth can be woven, the yarn has to be carefully spun. This was done by women and young children, but several spinsters were needed to keep each weaver at work. Several labor-saving machines were developed in the mid 18th century enabling yarn to be spun faster. The spinning mule was a culmination of these, so named because it represented the hybridization of two previous and separate inventions.
The mule produced strong, but thin yarn, which was suitable for any kind of textile. Initially, it was used for spinning cotton, but later applied to other fibres. The development of the mule was a step towards increased textile production in factories as the mule was too large for most homes. The reason for combining was because the spinning jenny could spin more thread at a time and the water frame used water power instead of man power. The combination of these two meant that the spinning mule could now spin more thread using water power.
Samuel Crompton was too poor to be able to apply for a patent for his invention. Instead, he sold the rights to David Dale, who patented it and collected the profits. Later, the mule was run off steam power. It has helped the advancement of the textile industry.
The spinning inventions were significant in enabling a great expansion to occur in the production of textiles, particularly cotton ones. Cotton and iron were leading sectors in the Industrial Revolution. Both industries underwent a great expansion at about the same time, which can be used to identify the start of the Industrial Revolution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinning_Mule
From Mary Bellis,Your Guide to Inventors.FREE Newsletter. Sign Up Now!
Reverend Edmund Cartwright patented the power loom.
The power loom was a steam-powered, mechanically operated version of a regular loom, an invention that combined threads to make cloth.
In 1785, Edmund Cartwright patented the first power loom and set up a factory in Doncaster, England to manufacture cloth. A prolific inventor, Edmund Cartwright also invented a wool-combing machine in 1789, continued to improve his power loom, invented a steam engine that used alcohol and a machine for making rope in 1797, and aided Robert Fulton with his steamboats.
Cartwright's power loom needed to be improved upon and several inventors did just that. It was improved upon by William Horrocks, the inventor of the variable speed batton (1813) and American, Francis Cabot Lowell. The power loom became commonly used after 1820.
View Image: Power Loom When the power loom became efficient, women replaced most men as weavers in the textile factories.
Power Looms in America
The first American power loom was constructed in 1813 by a group of Boston merchants headed by Francis Cabot Lowell.
zSB(3,3)
Sponsored Links
Free Patent InformationWe Help Inventors With Prototypes, Patents & Marketing. Free Info Kit!www.InventionHome.com
Industrial RevolutionEverything to do with Industrial Revolution items.Yahoo.com
New York InventorsLargest Online Inventor Community. 30-Day Free Trial, Join Today!ideatango.com/inventor_group
The city of Lowell and other early industrial American cities grew supporting a nearby Francis Cabot Lowell's designed power loom, an amended version of the British power loom invented by Edmund Cartwright. The power loom allowed the wholesale manufacture of cloth from ginned cotton, itself a recent innovation of Eli Whitney's.
According to the Lowell National Historical Park Handbook, for the first two centuries of American history, the weaving of cloth was a cottage industry, even after the introduction of power spinning frames in 1790. Yarn produced by machines in water-powered factories was still put out for weaving on hand looms in homes. All cloths were woven in basically the same way, although weavers followed patterns to produce cloths with intricate weaves. Because the operations of a loom focus on such a small working area, its movements must be exact. And weaving, as opposed to spinning, requires a cycle of sequential steps and involves reciprocal movement as well as circular. In a power loom, movements coordinated by human hand and eye have to be replicated through the precise interaction of levers, cams, gears, and springs. For these reasons, weaving was the last step in textile production to be mechanized.
Successful power looms were in operation in England by the early 1800s, but those made in America were inadequate. Francis Cabot Lowell realized that for the United States to develop a practical power loom, it would have to borrow British technology. While visiting English textile mills, he memorized the workings of their power looms. Upon his return, he recruited master mechanic Paul Moody to help him recreate and develop what he had seen. They succeeded in adapting the British design, and the machine shop established at the Waltham mills by Lowell and Moody continued to make improvements in the loom. With the introduction of a dependable power loom, weaving could keep up with spinning, and the American textile industry was underway.
http://inventors.about.com/od/cstartinventors/a/power_loom.htm
Reverend Edmund Cartwright (1743-1823)
Edmund Cartwright was originally from Nottingham. After graduating from Oxford University in 1779, he became the rector of Goadby church, Marwood in Leicestershire. In 1784 he visited Arkwright's cotton-spinning mill. Cartwright was sure that he could develop similar technology to benefit weaving.
In 1785, he patented the first version of his power loom and set up a factory in Doncaster. He was no businessman, however, and he went bankrupt in 1793, which forced him to close his factory.
Cartwright was a prolific inventor. He patented a wool-combing machine in 1789 and a steam engine that used alcohol, as well as a machine for making rope, in 1797. He even helped the American, Robert Fulton, with his steamboat inventions.
The power loom was quickly integrated into the weaving industry. It was improved upon by William Horrocks, famous for his invention of the variable speed batton in 1813. The power loom was used alongside Crompton's Spinning Mule in many factories. Although Cartwright did not make very much money from any of his patents, in 1809 the House of Commons voted him a sum of £10000 in recognition of his contribution to the textile industry. Cartwright retired to a farm in Kent, where he spent the rest of his life improving farm machinery.
http://inventors.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=inventors&cdn=money&tm=129&gps=78_27_1020_623&f=00&su=p554.2.150.ip_&tt=2&bt=0&bts=1&zu=http%3A//www.saburchill.com/history/chapters/IR/012.html
The invention of the steam engine by James Watt in 1776 represented a major advance in the development of powered machines. It was first applied to an industrial operation - the spinning of cotton - in 1785. A new kind of work-slave it not only marked the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, but also the coming age of mass production.In the England of the 18th century five important inventions in the textile industry advanced the automation of work processes. 1) John Kay's flying shuttle in 1733 , which permitted the weaving of larger widths of cloth and significantly increased weaving speed, 2) Edmund Cartwright's power loom in 1785, which increased weaving speed still further, 3) James Hargreaves' spinning jenny in 1764, 4) Richard Arkwright's water frame and 5) Samuel Crompton's spinning mule in 1779, whereby the last three inventions improved the speed and quality of thread-spinning operations. Those developments, combined with the invention of the steam engine, in short time led to the creation of new machine-slaves and the mechanization of the production of most major goods, such as iron, paper, leather, glass and bricks.Large-scale machine production was soon applied in many manufacturing sectors and resulted in a reduction of production costs. Yet the widespread use of the novel work-slaves also led to new demands concerning the work force's qualifications. The utilization of machines enabled a differentiated kind of division of labor and eventuated in a (further) specialization of skills. While before many goods were produced by skilled craftsmen the use of modern machinery increased the demand for semiskilled and unskilled workers. Also, the nature of the work process altered from one mainly dependent on physical power to one primarily dominated by technology and an increasing proportion of the labor force employed to operate machines.
http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611663/100438659368/?opmode=history
The spinning jenny is a multi-spool spinning wheel. It was invented circa 1764 by James Hargreaves in Stanhill, near Blackburn, Lancashire in the north west of England (although Thomas Highs is another candidate identified as the inventor). The device dramatically reduced the amount of work needed to produce yarn, with a single worker able to work eight or more spools at once.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinning_jenny
The water frame is the name given to the spinning frame, when water power was used to drive it. Both are credited to Richard Arkwright who patented and exploited the technology. It was based on an invention by Thomas Highs and the patent was later overturned. John Kay, a clock maker and mechanic who helped Highs build the spinning frame, sold the design to Arkwright (for what might be considered a derisory sum). It was Arkwright, however, who made the system work, realising that account had to be taken of the fibre lengths in the batch being spun.
The water frame is derived from the use of a water wheel to drive a number of spinning frames. The water wheel provided more power to the spinning frame than human operators, reducing the amount of human labor needed and increasing the spindle count dramatically. However, unlike the spinning jenny, the water frame could only spin one thread at a time until Samuel Crompton combined the two inventions into his spinning mule in 1779. However the water frame could be assembled with hundreds of spinning heads in a single building and was easy to operate.
In 1771 Arkwright installed the water frame in his cotton mill at Cromford, Derbyshire, on the River Derwent, creating one of the first factories that was specifically built to house machinery rather than just bringing workers together. He is considered an innovator as he combined water power,the water frame and machine factories.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_frame
The spinning mule was created in 1779 by Samuel Crompton. It was a combination of the water frame (created by Thomas Highs, initially falsely attributed to Richard Arkwright) and the spinning jenny (created by either John Kay or by James Hargreaves; sources differ). In short, it created high quality textiles, in a short amount of time.
Before cloth can be woven, the yarn has to be carefully spun. This was done by women and young children, but several spinsters were needed to keep each weaver at work. Several labor-saving machines were developed in the mid 18th century enabling yarn to be spun faster. The spinning mule was a culmination of these, so named because it represented the hybridization of two previous and separate inventions.
The mule produced strong, but thin yarn, which was suitable for any kind of textile. Initially, it was used for spinning cotton, but later applied to other fibres. The development of the mule was a step towards increased textile production in factories as the mule was too large for most homes. The reason for combining was because the spinning jenny could spin more thread at a time and the water frame used water power instead of man power. The combination of these two meant that the spinning mule could now spin more thread using water power.
Samuel Crompton was too poor to be able to apply for a patent for his invention. Instead, he sold the rights to David Dale, who patented it and collected the profits. Later, the mule was run off steam power. It has helped the advancement of the textile industry.
The spinning inventions were significant in enabling a great expansion to occur in the production of textiles, particularly cotton ones. Cotton and iron were leading sectors in the Industrial Revolution. Both industries underwent a great expansion at about the same time, which can be used to identify the start of the Industrial Revolution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinning_Mule
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)