Whitman and Working Class Reform
141
questions are answered in theory, how will labor achieve these ideals in practice?
In an attempt to answer these questions, New York working class reformers fell
into the broad categories of conservative and radical. Whitman, throughout the
1840s, vacillated between these two before emerging in 1855 with a new vision.
Conservative reformers sought to answer the questions raised by the shift from
an artisan to industrial economy by arguing for a moderated vision of the traditional
master-journeyman relationship. Specifically, whereas the master and journeyman
shared one shop and common duties, capital and labor would now work in
partnership with particular, exclusive means to a common end, namely, profit.
This required a synergetic and mutually interested relationship between capital
and labor. Accordingly, labor would find its new place in the Republic by becoming
a class whose values and interests were conducive to the profitable production of
goods for the economic benefit of all. This ideal would be achieved by the “uplift”
of the American working class and the creation of responsible, virtuous workers.
This conservative project has early origins in the American industrial revolution.
The General Society of Mechanics and Tradesmen (founded in 1785) had, by the
1820s, become deeply influenced by the evangelical reform movements of the era
and sought to establish “that systematic and methodical arrangement of business
so indispensable to the good regulation of every establishment.”®Joseph Brewster
represents a typical reformer of this ilk. A skilled master hatter, Brewster had, by
the 1820s, declared his conversion to evangelical Christianity, been elected to the
General Society, and formed, with the master book-binder Charles Starr, the
Association for Moral Improvement of Young Mechanics.^ 'fhis association sought
to encourage the city’s laborers to fulfill their obligations “to the City and to God”‘°
and promised employers that temperance, Christian habits and a dedication to home
and church would improve their profits by twenty-five percent.‘‘ However, for
these conservatives, this position was no covert attempt to secure greater profits,
but rather an attempt to pro tect “the security of republican institutions from a drunk,
corruptible electorate.” ’- For these reasons, the General Society founded a
mechanics’ school and apprentices library for moral and educational uplift’^ To
conservatives like Brewster, this movement was an attempt to utilize their new
found social status by promoting an “uplift” that idealized the older, mutually
beneficial relationship of master and journeyman. One prominent conservative
reformer in this period declared that “what is good for the head is good for its
members”’"’ in an attempt to summarize his vision of the labor-capital relationship.
The conservative position solidified in the 1840s and 1850s. A Whig politician
and sympathizer to conservative reformers, Alexander H.H. Stuart, summarized
this position in a speech to the American Institute:
...We have no necessity for factory bills, or a system of legislative
police to guard the operative against the exactions of his employers. Here