Two Accounts of the 1912 Textile Strike
The following are two accounts of the 1912 Lawrence, Massachusetts, textile strike. A company report states: 'The strike was instigated by outside agitators from the Industrial Workers of the World. Only about 15 percent of our employees participated; the majority reported for work but were intimidated at the gates.' A worker's diary entry from the same week reads: 'At six in the morning, nearly every loom in the mill was silent. The gates were locked from the inside. We stood outside in the cold, and the company men said few had joined us, but I counted hundreds of neighbors I knew from the weave room.' A local newspaper reports that 'the mills were closed by a general walkout' but does not give numbers. A historian wants to determine what actually happened.
1. What specific factual claim is contradicted between the company report and the worker's diary?
Read the worked answer
The company report claims that only about 15% of employees participated and that the majority reported for work. The worker's diary claims that 'nearly every loom in the mill was silent' and that the writer counted hundreds of neighbors from the weave room outside. These are directly contradictory: the company says most worked; the diary says production stopped and many joined the walkout. The newspaper's statement that 'the mills were closed by a general walkout' supports the diary's account over the company's participation figure, though it gives no numbers. The contradiction is about the extent of participation, not about whether a strike occurred.
2. Which source is more reliable for estimating participation numbers, and why? Consider potential biases.
Read the worked answer
Neither source is neutral. The company report has an incentive to minimize participation to undermine the strike's legitimacy and to portray workers as intimidated rather than acting collectively. The worker's diary has an incentive to emphasize solidarity and mass participation, and the writer's count of 'hundreds' is impressionistic. However, the company's specific 15% figure is a precise claim that can be checked against payroll or production records, while the diary offers a qualitative observation. The newspaper's independent report of a 'general walkout' corroborates the diary's direction. A historian should trust the newspaper's general characterization more than either side's numbers, and seek payroll records.
3. What can the historian reasonably conclude from the newspaper's statement that 'the mills were closed by a general walkout'?
Read the worked answer
The newspaper corroborates that the mills were not operating normally and that the event was widely perceived as a general walkout, not a minor disruption. This undermines the company's claim that the majority reported for work. However, 'general walkout' is not a precise participation rate; it does not tell us whether 60% or 95% joined. The historian can conclude that the strike was substantial and that the company's 15% figure is likely an undercount, but cannot determine exact numbers from the newspaper alone. The statement also suggests the event was significant enough to merit public notice, supporting the diary's account over the company's minimization.