the perils of personal capital in antebellum america: john spotswood wellford and virginia's...
TRANSCRIPT
This article was downloaded by [Umearing University Library]On 05 October 2014 At 0320Publisher RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number 1072954 Registeredoffice Mortimer House 37-41 Mortimer Street London W1T 3JH UK
Business HistoryPublication details including instructions for authors andsubscription informationhttpwwwtandfonlinecomloifbsh20
The perils of personal capital inantebellum America John SpotswoodWellford and Virginias CatharineFurnaceSean Patrick Adamsa
a History University of Florida Gainesville Florida USAPublished online 11 Feb 2013
To cite this article Sean Patrick Adams (2013) The perils of personal capital in antebellumAmerica John Spotswood Wellford and Virginias Catharine Furnace Business History 5581339-1360 DOI 101080000767912012745067
To link to this article httpdxdoiorg101080000767912012745067
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor amp Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (theldquoContentrdquo) contained in the publications on our platform However Taylor amp Francisour agents and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy completeness or suitability for any purpose of the Content Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authorsand are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor amp Francis The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses actions claimsproceedings demands costs expenses damages and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content
This article may be used for research teaching and private study purposes Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction redistribution reselling loan sub-licensingsystematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden Terms ampConditions of access and use can be found at httpwwwtandfonlinecompageterms-and-conditions
Business History 2013
Vol 55 No 8 1339ndash1360 httpdxdoiorg101080000767912012745067
The perils of personal capital in antebellum America John Spotswood Wellford and Virginiarsquos Catharine Furnace
Sean Patrick Adams
History University of Florida Gainesville Florida USA
The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Companyrsquos ironmaking facility Catharine Furnace had the look of a prime mover in antebellum Virginiarsquos industrial sector when it opened in 1838 Its manager and principal owner John Spotswood Wellford successfully tapped into his social capital to secure military ordnance contracts but in the process the firm became utterly dependent upon his ability to secure this work through personal connections By failing to expand the market for its pig iron and castings in local regional and national markets the firm relied upon these ordnance contracts for shot and shell for its existence When Wellford died in 1846 the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company collapsed A few years later Catharine Furnace stood cold and abandoned ndash a severe reminder of the limited prospects of Virginiarsquos industrial economy and the perils of relying on an individual entrepreneurrsquos personal capital during a critical period of American industrialisation
Keywords US antebellum US South Virginia entrepreneurship social capital industrialisation iron military contracting
Introduction
The prospects for ironmaking in Virginia seemed very bright in the earlymonths of 1836 as
the entire economy appeared awash with money An influx of Mexican silver engorged the
nationrsquos supply of hard currency at the same time that Andrew Jacksonrsquos lsquoslayingrsquo of the
Bank of the United States triggered a dramatic ndash and intemperate ndash expansion of bank
loans The price of basic commodities like cotton and wheat continued to press higher and
higher while land values soared Iron seemed a particularly attractive investment on
national regional and local levels1 The South and Virginia in particular were going
through a railroad building boom that would ensure a high demand for iron rails for years
In the winter of 1836ndash37 Virginia pig iron sold anywhere from $50 to $55 a ton ndash more
than double the $25 per ton that pig iron commanded in 1832 and at least $10 higher than
the average price of charcoal iron in Philadelphia lsquoThe Virginia iron industry though a
worthy pioneerrsquo historian Kathleen Bruce argued lsquohad worked with mole-like
inconspicuousnessrsquo particularly in the areas of eastern Virginia The swell in economic
activity combined with the effect of a protective tariff to create according to Bruce a new
lsquospeculative spiritrsquo after 1835 which reinvigorated interest in the Virginia iron industry2
Email spadamsufledu
q 2013 Taylor amp Francis
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1340 SP Adams
Of course the Panic of 1837 and subsequent years of a crushing economic depression ndash
the worst the United States had ever seen ndash was on the horizon but a boommentality gripped
Virginiarsquos capital In a session that saw a flurry of corporate chartering occur in Richmond
several Virginians sought to capitalise on the high-flying economy Some of them sought to
revive the semi-dormant iron industry of Eastern Virginia On 21 March 1836 the Virginia
Legislature passed an act incorporating the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Company This 20-year charter authorised the company to manufacture lsquoiron steel and
materials of the like naturersquo and allowed the ownership of up to 5000 acres of land in
Spotsylvania Stafford Orange Louisa Culpepper Rappahannock and Fauquier counties
Its five original incorporators Francis Deane John Heth John SpotswoodWellford Edward
H Carmichael and Alexander Henderson were charged with raising a capital amount
between $50000 and $150000 via shares with a par value of $100 each Although shares of
stock in the company were open for purchase by the public ownership of the firm was
divided into five equal parts This effectively meant that the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company although technically a corporation subject to public ownership
operated as a partnership between the five original incorporators This was not an altogether
unusual arrangement in the antebellum Virginia business world as it allowed for large
amounts of land and capital stock ownership without the complicated inheritance issues that
sometimes plagued limited partnerships and proprietary firms3
As one of the easternmost operations in Virginiarsquos charcoal iron industry the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company stood well positioned to serve
urban markets both to the north and south as well as the thriving city of Fredericksburg
Its manager and one of its founding incorporators John Spotswood Wellford was an
experienced and well-connected business leader with strong ties to banking internal
improvements and mining interests in the region The companyrsquos land in nearby
Spotsylvania County had abundant stocks of iron ore and charcoal-producing forests As it
was situated in the region from which many hired slaves in Western Virginiarsquos charcoal
iron industry originated Wellford enjoyed a comparative advantage over its local
competitors for securing inexpensive enslaved labour In sum the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company had the look of a prime mover in antebellum Virginiarsquos
economy and seemed poised to be a dynamic industrial firm Yet its reliance upon one
individual gave this endeavour all the disadvantages of a proprietary firm at the same time
that it ostensibly operated as a corporate firm during a time of great turmoil in the
American iron trade In the end the company known informally by its sole ironmaking
facility Catharine Furnace would demonstrate the perils of banking upon personal capital
at a time in American industrial development when corporate organisation and
investments in physical capital took precedence John Spotswood Wellford demonstrated
entrepreneurial talent in making an iron furnace work under the most difficult of market
conditions But in doing so Wellfordrsquos Catharine Furnace became a symbol of Virginia
indeed of the Upper Southrsquos failure to develop a thriving industrial sector in the decades
prior to the American Civil War
John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
The role of individual entrepreneurs in pushing industrial change in the antebellum United
States has undergone a historical revival of sorts Recent scholarship has emphasised
factors such as family connections religious and philanthropic outlooks and ideas about
class relations in reconstructing entrepreneurship during that period This follows a wider
trend among business historians Pamela Walker Laird in a special issue of this journal in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1341
2008 suggested that looking at lsquosocial capitalrsquo or the lsquoassets based on personal
connections and connectabilityrsquo can provide new insights into entrepreneurial behaviour
and success Although social capital like its more traditional counterpart does not
guarantee success or failure by its mere presence historians need to recognise those social
and cultural connections when tracing economic activity especially during times when
lsquofew other assurances of predictability reliability authority and reciprocity existrsquo This is
an especially potent point in a society just beginning to undergo industrial development
In antebellum New England for example bankers might use personal or family
connections to facilitate loans of capital to industrial endeavours and notions of
paternalistic obligations shaped factories as much as market conditions Recognising the
constant interplay of economic and social forces with this idea of social capital then has
infused the study of entrepreneurship during this period of American history when so
much about the economy was in flux with a new energy4
As scholars of the American South struggle to understand the regionrsquos distinct history
of industrial growth different variables such as soil quality climate and of course the
wider political and cultural impact of slavery all factor into the context in which southern
entrepreneurship developed Recent work from Jonathan Wells Frank Byrne and Bruce
Eelman on the development of the antebellum Southrsquos commercial class suggests that
even as they lagged behind the North in many quantitative measures of economic growth
southern merchants were very much a part of the emergent capitalist economy of the
antebellum United States The history of manufacturing in areas like the South Carolina
upcountry or northern Georgia according to recent work by Thomas Downey and Michael
Gagnon offers an example of a thriving if more modest industrial sector at work
Although this literature on the Southrsquos antebellum industrial economy has gone a long way
to discredit the notion that the region was lsquobackwardsrsquo or lsquopre-modernrsquo entrepreneurs still
struggled to facilitate industrial growth in the South So even as they might share the
reserves of social capital through personal and family connections wealth and vision of
their northern counterparts individuals like John Spotswood Wellford had to negotiate a
different and in many ways more difficult context for industrial development5
Wellfordrsquos career offers a fruitful direction to study southern entrepreneurship because
his story blends elements of both the agrarian and the industrial South ndash he enjoyed large
amounts of social capital in both worlds The son of Dr Robert Wellford a prominent
physician in Fredericksburg John Spotswood Wellford took up a career as a dry goods
merchant with contacts across the nation This work offered him many opportunities to
cultivate business contacts in the North and he travelled far and wide in the pursuit of
them In 1819 his father noted that John returned to Fredericksburg safe lsquofrom the
prevalent disease of Northern Cities ndash and the dangers of the boisterous winds when
traveling broad watersrsquo After he became prosperous John settled into the traditional
southern investments in land and slaves In addition to his well-appointed house in
Fredericksburg Wellford owned 1357 acres in Spotsylvania County valued at $4507873
on which he would build a country residence and farm His land as he soon discovered
contained rich deposits of iron ore Spotswood also owned at least 24 slaves five of whom
resided in the Fredericksburg house and 19 in his Spotsylvania estate As a member of the
Fredericksburg Agricultural Society John Wellford served on a committee to promote
innovations in planting and animal husbandry through exhibitions and fairs He also
participated in Fredericksburgrsquos Agricultural Society Show and Fair where he sat on
several prize committees His own agricultural pursuits won him honours for the lsquoBest
Fatted Work Oxenrsquo and lsquoBest Grass-Fed Beefrsquo in 1835 and five years later took home the
award for the best turnips in the region6
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1342 SP Adams
Although he was a wealthy farmer slaveholder and a leading member of
Fredericksburg society John Spotswood Wellford developed political contacts that
aligned him with the Whig Party He first tested the political waters as a founding member
of Fredericksburgrsquos Anti-Jackson Committee in 1827 When Henry Clay visited
Fredericksburg a year later he received well-wishers and political aspirants at Wellfordrsquos
house Wellford followed Clay into the Whig Party where he served as a prominent figure
in Spotsylvania Countyrsquos local party apparatus In 1834 he participated prominently in a
convention that denounced President Jacksonrsquos removal of federal deposits from the Bank
of the United States chaired several Spotsylvania County Whig Party meetings and
headlined a formal request that Henry Clay come to Fredericksburg to do a lsquopublic
entertainmentrsquo in 1840 He joined the Fredericksburg Auxiliary to the American
Colonization Society in 1826 and served as a manager for several years Despite his
affiliation with the ACSrsquos mild form of anti-slavery John owned slaves throughout his
life In 1835 he was named to a committee to explore lsquomeasures necessary to be adopted
in regard to the movements making in the Northern States with respect to the Abolition of
Slaveryrsquo Apparently mild anti-slavery initiatives sat well with John Spotswood Wellford
but any immediate threats to the lsquopeculiar institutionrsquo provoked an urgent response
His brother and close business associate Beverly soon thereafter joined the
Fredericksburg Anti-Abolition Committee7
Wellford needed help from outside Virginia in order to develop his landrsquos industrial
potential He found investment capital difficult to come by in Fredericksburg even though
he served on the Bank of Virginiarsquos board for many years John Majewski has
demonstrated that elsewhere in Virginia a similar dearth of investment capital for canal
and railroad development forced the state to subsidise ndash often poorly ndash the growth of the
Old Dominionrsquos transportation infrastructure Instead of state subsidies Wellford tried to
use his social capital here in the form of some northern contacts to develop the industrial
resources of his landholdings He wrote to the Philadelphia merchant and ironmaster
Samuel G Wright in 1823 touting the richness of Spotsylvania Countyrsquos ore deposits
After sending Wright a sample he wrote that lsquoI am informed the land abounds with it it is
to be found in great quantities of the same quality sent you and that near the surfacersquo
Wellford reported that the tract for sale was lsquoabout ten miles on a turnpike road from this
place to the land I understand the tract is a large one and for sale the land is generally very
poor and consequently may be purchased cheaprsquo and offered to lsquosend you a few Tons of
the ore where you could better judge of the propriety of working the purchasersquo Nearly four
years later Wellford still offered hopes that Wright would invest in ore mining Even
though he inadvertently revealed the lack of indigenous investment in Spotsylvania ore
fields by claiming lsquothere is no fear of competition so you will lose nothing by a little
delayrsquo Wellford hoped to secure Wrightrsquos partnership Neither overture resulted in a land
purchase and the quest for northern investment in Spotsylvania County failed8
Internal improvements in the region formed as one of John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos true
passions as he was involved personally in a number of projects over a number of years
Yet like his quest for northern investment in ore land Wellfordrsquos dreams of integrating
Fredericksburg within the nationrsquos growing transportation network never really came to
pass Plans for improving the Rappahannock River in order to link Fredericksburgrsquos
tidewater port to upriver markets date back to the late eighteenth century and by 1811 the
Virginia Legislature commissioned the Rappahannock Company to oversee the lsquoopening
clearing and extending the inland navigationrsquo of the river In 1816 state officials
commissioned an official survey of the route but these ambitious plans stalled Wellford
was a director of a later version of this firm called the RappahannockNavigation Company
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1343
which received corporate charters from the state in 1826 and 1828 Johnrsquos warehouse held
the lumber ready for the construction of locks he advertised for lsquo10 or fifteen able bodied
negro menrsquo to work on the project and at a groundbreaking ceremony offered a toast in
praise of the Virginia Board of Public Works lsquoThe fund of Internal Improvement ndash the
State helps those who help themselvesrsquo These ambitious plans again ran into trouble as
company officials deemed the Rappahannock navigation inadequate by 18369 In 1831
Wellford was unanimously elected secretary and treasurer of the Fredericksburg and
Potomac Company a firm that sought to build a turnpike then railroad linking the city to a
steamboat landing on Potomac Creek Although the founders predicted their system could
carry merchandise from Fredericksburg to Baltimore in 10 hours or less this plan also
failed to materialise A year later he helped secure a charter for the Fredericksburg and
Potomac Creek Railroad Company which apparently failed to attract enough stock
subscriptions Finally in 1835 John agreed to serve as a manager of the Rappahannock and
Blue Ridge Railroad yet another plan that failed to come to fruition10
All of these unfinished projects must have been frustrating for John Spotswood
Wellford Although he remained a prominent public figure in Fredericksburg an
upstanding member of the Presbyterian Church the anchor of a well-respected and
influential family and a successful banker and merchant his attempts to bring industrial
prosperity to his home town seemed mired in mediocrity So while he maintained a web of
contacts in these social economic and political circles this social capital was somewhat
limited in its efficacy In many ways he developed lsquopersonalrsquo rather than lsquosocialrsquo capital
as his various connections with fellow landholders Whigs and internal improvement
boosters did not translate into real change in the region even as they marked him
individually as one of the leading advocates of industrial development in the
Fredericksburg area This was reflected by Wellfordrsquos rather unconventional role as the
scion of a wealthy Virginia family he owned land but seemed more interested in
cultivating its iron ore than coaxing tobacco or wheat out of the ground Wellford owned
slaves but also belonged to an anti-slavery society He came from a well-connected and
affluent Fredericksburg family but sought to make connections with northern investors
and merchants throughout his career Like many entrepreneurs across history John
Spotswood Wellford demonstrated a willingness to break from the expected trajectory of
his life ndash he wanted to use his personal capital for material gain In 1836 he would get that
chance during the short-lived boom in the Virginia charcoal iron trade
The birth of Catharine Furnace
lsquoThe construction of the hearth is a business in which the founder takes an active partrsquo
Frederick Overman wrote in the 1854 version of his extensive guidebook The Manufacture
of Iron in All its Various Branches As the furnace superintendent drawing an annual salary
of $1000 John Spotswood Wellford undoubtedly involved himself in the early
construction and operation of the furnace First and foremost he gave the furnace its
distinctive name lsquoCatharinersquo after his mother Catharine Yates Wellford But perhaps
more importantly Wellford kept a careful account of the cost of labour and materials that
went into the making of Catharine Furnace This account book provides an invaluable
insight into the furnace operation Wellfordrsquos entries shown in Figure 1 were terse in the
fashion of most nineteenth-century business account books Nonetheless these entries
provide a narrative history of both the day-to-day and long-term goals of the enterprise
Even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company was a corporate
endeavour John Spotswood Wellford ran the business much like a proprietary owner
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1344 SP Adams
Figure 1 Typical page of John Wellfordrsquos Catharine Furnace Account Book Source Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC)
By the end of 1837 the construction tab had run to a little more than $7000 When coupled
with the cost of acquiring land for charcoaling and mining ore this put Catharine Furnace
well within the cost range of the average Virginia charcoal furnace but much beyond the
range of most individual proprietors11
Iron furnaces were usually lsquoblown inrsquo in the early spring so it was important that
Catharine Furnace be completed in the winter of 1837ndash38 By early January a set of hearth
stones had been delivered to the site for inside lining of the furnace the final brickwork on
the furnace was being completed and the furnacersquos lsquosuction enginersquo (most likely a steam
engine for operating the furnace bellows) had been repaired and was ready for use
A sizeable work force of at least 86 slaves was in place with 19 slaves allocated to work in
various ore mines in the area Although no official production figures are extant Wellfordrsquos
account book notes that by May of 1838 the first shipment of iron was hauled away from
the area The shipment of new hearth stones in late September signalled a successful first
blast as furnace linings often wore away as workers continually fed the blast12
Making the iron was only one facet of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Companyrsquos business how they could transport their goods to market was an entirely
different struggle Overland travel was the simplest and most common option but also the
most expensive Virginiarsquos charcoal iron operations needed to be located near ample
supplies of ore and timber which usually meant they were in sparsely populated areas
When Rockbridge Countyrsquos William Weaver sought to expand his iron manufacturing
business in 1826 he purposely located his new forge close to his blast furnace so as to
minimise the distance that the heavy iron pigs would travel in wagons or carts The Union
Forge in Patrick County paid $8 per ton to ship its iron only a short distance to market
In this regard Catharine Furnacersquos close proximity to Fredericksburg and its flat terrain
gave it an advantage over other Virginia charcoal iron furnaces the majority of which were
located in the mountainous counties in theValley ofVirginia The Swift RunGap Turnpike
commonly known as the Orange Turnpike served as Spotsylvania Countyrsquos major road
project The arearsquos distinctive red clay in the words of one historian was lsquosticky as fish glue
when wetrsquo and caked aroundwagon wheels Conditions on this road were so bad moreover
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1345
that in 1823 a lawsuit found the company negligent of regular repair and maintenance
Hauling iron in these conditions could be done over short distances only which ruled out
most overland routes for shipping iron from Spotsylvania County13
Whenever possible Virginia ironmakers shipped their products to market via natural
or improved waterways William Weaverrsquos placement of his new forge in 1826 sought to
reduce overland shipping costs but also put manufacturing iron within easy distance of the
North River where flat-bottomed boats could ship directly to major market centres When
the James River and Kanawha Canal reached the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains at
Lynchburg in 1840 the ironmakers of the Valley saw a dramatic reduction in
transportation costs to Richmond Even though John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos dream of easy
water navigation on the upper Rappahannock failed to materialise Fredericksburg still
served as an important link to the eastern seaboard via its tidewater port An 1835 guide to
Virginia referred to Fredericksburg as a lsquoprosperous portrsquo and noted that its wharves could
handle vessels up to 140 tons Local officials felt that they could have more support in
developing seaborne traffic from their state and federal governments In 1836 citizens
petitioned Congress to make Fredericksburg an official port of entry ndash ships had to pay
collection duties at Tappahannock 60 miles lower on the Rappahannock River ndash arguing
that this has caused lsquogreat trouble expense and inconveniencersquo to their merchants
Nonetheless iron could be shipped by water out of Fredericksburg at a fraction of the cost
of land transport and this would remain the major outlet for Wellfordrsquos iron business
throughout the antebellum period14
Fredericksburgrsquos connection to Virginiarsquos railway network was provided by the
Richmond Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad Company Chartered in 1834 this
railroad at first contained a rare and controversial clause that gave it the exclusive rights to
build a rail line between Richmond and Washington DC The Supreme Court struck down
this clause but the RFampP nonetheless served as the major north ndash south artery for eastern
Virginia by linking Fredericksburg to Richmond in 1837 The RFampP later built a branch to
Aquia Creek in 1842 which connected Fredericksburg to Washington DC via steamboat
Unfortunately many of these transportation projects were limited at the time Wellford
turned to iron manufacturing as the many failures in the regionrsquos internal improvements
kept Fredericksburg on the margins of Virginiarsquos budding industrial economy
One geographer notes that as Alexandria expanded from the north and Richmond
extended from the south by 1835 Fredericksburg lsquodid not reflect a tightly integrated
settlement system and this pervasive weakness highlighted the fragile underpinnings of the
local economyrsquo15
Despite the unsteady connections to market John Spotswood Wellford successfully
brought Catharine Furnace into producing iron in short order Unfortunately the price of
iron plunged right at the time that the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Company started selling it The economic downturn on the heels of the Panic of 1837
pushed iron prices to about half ndash $25 to $22 a ton ndash the level that they had been in the
previous year Luckily the company had a number of close ties with potential customers
$140080 worth of Catharine Furnace pig iron went to the Fredericksburg Union
Manufacturing Company in 1838 and another $111800 in the following year Undoubtedly
the presence of two Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company stockholders
William Crump and Edward Carmichael on the board of this local firm helped close that
sale Wellfordrsquos account book suggests that most of Catharine Furnacersquos initial production
made its way to the Tredegar Iron Company in Richmond where it would have most likely
been made into bar rails in Tredegarrsquos new rolling mill As Francis Deane served as both a
major stockholder in the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1346 SP Adams
the President of the Tredegar Iron Company the purchase of $2500 ndash or 55 of Catharine
Furnacersquos sales in 1838 ndash worth of pig iron benefited both firms16
John hoped to reach markets outside the Old Dominion in Catharine Furnacersquos initial
years of iron production His years spent working the dry goods trade in the North offered
some contacts his extensive family connections offered other potential forms of social
capital While his younger brother Charles Carter Wellford was in New York City on
business in 1838 John shipped a sample of Catharine Furnace iron for testing in that
market The iron must have answered relatively well as Wood Johnston amp Burritt a dry
goods firm in New York City with ties to Richmond Virginia purchased $22818 worth of
iron from Wellford that same year Three years later Wood Johnston and Burritt sold
another $116729 worth of Catharine Furnace iron shipped to them via the schooner
Andrew Browne The only other out-of-state customer in 1838 was CG Morris of
Charleston South Carolina who purchased $22818 worth of pig iron and sash weights
from Wellford17
The quest for new markets continued over the next few years with varying levels of
success In February of 1839 Wellford sold two tons of iron to a customer in the District of
Columbia No additional entries appear for this particular buyer so it seems that Catharine
Furnace iron did not take off in the Washington area That same year Wellford shipped six
tons of pig iron to Boston at $2751 per ton The New England market seemed a bit more
promising as Wellford received $291568 in sales from Charles Dyer of Providence
This was most likely pig iron for use by the Phoenix Iron Foundry Company a Providence
firm that manufactured various finished iron products such as gear wheels and specialised
machine tools In 1841 Wellford noted in his account book that lsquoiron was taken to
Portland to try the marketrsquo by Captain Freeman Smith and that Smith sold at least three
tons at $2632 per ton in Maine18
In its early years the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company exploited
Francis Deanersquos high position in Tredegar Iron Company thus making personal
connections between the incorporators essential to the firmrsquos early survival Deane had
been present in the creation of many Virginia ironworks and his personal connections in the
state trade were unparalleled In 1839 alone Tredegar purchased $16500 ndash probably over
500 tons worth ndash of iron from Catharine Furnace As an incorporator of the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company Deane had the opportunity to enrich both his
primary employer as well as his Fredericksburg investment by purchasing pig iron from
Catharine Furnace The following year however sales to Tredegar slowed to $3500 and no
more major transactions between the two companies occurred after 1840 This was in part
due to the financial problems suffered by the TredegarWorks and in particular the result of
Deanersquos inability to sell the firmrsquos products By 1841 the fortunes of the Tredegar Works
were in the words of Kathleen Bruce at a very lsquolow ebbrsquo and Deane was on his way out as
the companyrsquos chief executive the following year Tredegarrsquos ties with Fredericksburg
continued after Deanersquos departure Joseph Reid Anderson contacted John Spotswood
Wellford in the summer of 1841 to inquire about introducing Tredegar iron in
Fredericksburg Apparently the two had discussed the project in Washington DC and
Anderson offered Wellford work as an agent of the Tredegar Iron Works lsquoFrom the prices
paid as I understand and quantity of country iron shipped there from [Richmond]rsquo
Andersonwrote lsquoas well as the high character of the Tred Iron at present I am led to believe
that advantage to all concerned may accrue from its introduction into that marketrsquo Some
Catharine Furnace iron was sold out of Tredegarrsquos yard in Richmond as David J Burr amp
Co purchased seventeen tons in 1841 found that load wanting in quality and so asked
Wellford to replace the iron In the summer of 1845 a manager at Tredegar offered to
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1347
purchase 60 or 70 tons of lsquohigh and mottled Pig Ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace at the
relatively high rate of $28 per ton19
Making shot and shell for Washington
Following Deanersquos departure from Richmond the future of Catharine Furnace was even
more in the hands of John Spotswood Wellford In a sense he used this turn of events to
turn his individual connections ndash in this case much more lsquopersonalrsquo than lsquosocialrsquo capital ndash
to the benefit of his ironmaking business In 1841 Wellford increased his individual
ownership in the company to a little over 40 through the purchase of a controlling
amount of capital stock from one of the original incorporators His son William Wellford
also held Edward Carmichaelrsquos share in trust thus giving the Wellford family functional
command over the firm as they controlled 60 of the corporation The first three full years
of operation at Catharine Furnace had seen sales totals of $450191 in 1838 $18376 in
1839 and $677568 in 1840 ndash a total combined revenue of $2965359 Revenues thus
lagged well behind the accumulated operating costs of the furnace that had run to
$6874891 by 1840 Figure 2 shows this trend Clearly a new business strategy was
needed in order to make this endeavour work as Catharine Furnace had difficulties
breaking into various private markets In the summer of 1841 John Spotswood Wellford
Francis Deane and Edward Carmichael all travelled to Washington DC to seek ordnance
contracts from the United States War Department Like its earlier connections with
Tredegar the firmrsquos directors sought to turn their social capital into financial success 20
As it turns out contracting with the federal government suited Catharine Furnace quite
well so long as John Spotswood Wellford was in charge Ordnance contracts were
arranged between the War or Navy departments and individuals so the status and
reputation of an individual contractor weighed heavy on the process On 11 September
1841 Wellford signed a contract with the Navy to deliver 70000 rounds of 32 lb solid
shot at three cents a pound to Gosport Naval Yard in Norfolk Virginia The contract came
Figure 2 Estimates of operating costs and sales at Catharine Furnace 1837 ndash 46 Source Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1348 SP Adams
into force on 2 February 1842 with the final delivery of shot taking place by 31 January
1844 Pending inspection and satisfaction by the Navy Wellford would receive $67200
from the federal government In the spring of 1842 Catharine Furnace obtained shot
patterns from James Walker That summer at least five moulders William H Ferguson
William Pulham R Parker Nicholas Wharton and A Sutherland were hard at work
making 32 lb solid shot from Catharine Furnace iron and in June of 1842 Wellford sent
his first shipment of 5230 shot to Norfolk Naval records indicate that the ordnance officers
at Gosport received over 24000 shot by the end of 1842 Shipments tended to occur fairly
regularly and Catharine Furnace produced an impressive amount of ordnance in a
relatively short period of time as illustrated in Table 1 Assuming that each piece of 32 lb
solid shot actually weighed 32 pounds ndash an assumption that did not always hold true for
nineteenth-century naval ordnance ndash then the estimated value of Wellfordrsquos contract in
1842 alone was roughly $232089621
On the surface Catharine Furnacersquos success with military contracting put the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company on a strong trajectory With the
federal government providing a strong income stream Wellford might have parlayed his
success in ordnance into wider markets for his iron Historians of technology have
provided many examples in which antebellum military enterprise helped reorganise and
refine production techniques in northern government installations like the armouries at
Springfield Massachusetts and Philadelphia as well as with private contractors like
Connecticutrsquos Samuel Colt Virginiarsquos Harpers Ferry Armory exhibited a less than
exemplary record with regard to streamlining the production of muskets and small arms
But in the end even isolated Harpers Ferry entered the modern industrial age So at least
among northern industries military enterprise was in the words of Merritt Roe Smith a
lsquokey ingredient in the evolution of complex technological systemsrsquo and served as a critical
factor in that regionrsquos antebellum industrialisation22
Rather than diversify its production line or markets Catharine Furnacersquos manager
expanded further into the highly volatile ordnance trade Using his personal connections
with the Navy Wellford secured yet another contract for 70000 32 lb solid shot in
February of 1843 The terms of the contract were the same as the 1841 deal although this
time Wellford had less than a year to complete it Since he shipped only about a third of
this amount from Catharine Furnace in 1842 it is questionable whether or not Wellford
expected to produce all of the contracted shot at his own works It was not uncommon for
contractors even if they owned or operated an iron furnace themselves to sub-contract
Table 1 32 lb solid shot shipped to Gosport naval yard from Catharine Furnace 1842
Amount Received Estimated Value ($)
22 June 1842 5250 504000 22 June 1842 2623 251808 18 July 1842 3507 336672 4 August 1842 1692 162432 20 August 1842 2227 213792 8 September 1842 2102 201792 22 September 1842 1401 134496 3 October 1842 1874 179904 3 November 1842 3500 336000 Total 24176 2320896
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1349
production out to other firms at times In fact Wellford notes in his account book that 118
tons of pig iron shipped from the Fredericksburg wharf to Catharine Furnace in 1842 to be
melted into ball in his cupola furnaces Whether or not he had purchased this iron from
other furnaces or recalled it from pig iron meant for sale elsewhere is unclear But a year
later Wellford paid for 55 cartloads or 275 tons of pig iron from the Fredericksburg
wharf back to Catharine Furnace noting that this iron had been sent back from Boston
unsold lsquoon acct of its being so whitersquo and lsquowas therefore worked into ballrsquo23
Producing shot for the Navy secured a solid stream of income for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as a steady demand for iron for the
workers at Catharine Furnace These ordnance contracts required constant vigilance
however as Wellford visited Washington DC on numerous occasions to maintain his
personal connections with the War Department He also paid William Ridgely $8500 lsquofor
arranging accts and settling with [the] Naval Boardrsquo in 1842 Ridgely was a long-time
employee of the Navy who had been the Chief Clerk of the Naval Commissioners until
September of 1842 when he took a new position as Chief Clerk to the Bureau of Navy
Yards and Docks Sporadic payments to Ridgely ranging from $2000 to $10000
continued over the next few years but Wellfordrsquos entries do not give a full account of the
services rendered to him It is likely that Wellfordrsquos various contacts in Washington
provided him with valuable information When he learned that a Baltimore firm had failed
to supply 5000 cannon shot and that inspection officials had rejected 5000 additional units
Wellford wrote to Commodore WM Crane to see if he could provide any information
about securing a contract for himself to make up the 10000 in lost shot to the Navy24
Wellford also tried to squeeze larger profit margins out of the contract by rearranging
one of Catharine Furnacersquos great economic disadvantages ndash its high cost of transportation
The 1843 contract for example had an allowance of $2 per ton from Catharine Furnace to
Fredericksburg and another $1 per ton from Fredericksburg to Gosport In March of 1843
a naval official informed Wellford that lsquoafter reciting the price to be given for the shot
transportation to Fredericksburg and freight that no other allowance is to be madersquo for
shipping shot to Norfolk Whether or not the inspection of the ordnance occurred at
the furnace or at the naval yard was another factor in making contracts profitable Shot
and shell that was rejected at Catharine Furnace could be recast cheaply on the spot
rejected ordnance at Gosport needed to be shipped back to the furnace at the companyrsquos
expense Shipments to Gosport in the summer of 1843 were delayed by late arrival of an
inspection officer to Fredericksburg Some years later Wellford complained to the Navy
that their insistence upon inspections at the yard increased his already prohibitive
transportation costs25
Needless to say Wellford found ordnance a lucrative business for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company By 1843 Wellfordrsquos contracts with the War
Department were providing nearly all of Catharine Furnacersquos income This strategy
carried some risk as Wellford lost out on a contract to provide shot and shell for the Navy
in 1844 This contract went to the Tredegar Company now under the leadership of Joseph
Reid Anderson and making not only basic ordnance like shot and shell but also casting
cannon for the Federal government Like Catharine Furnace Tredegar drew upon strong
personal connections to Washington officials to secure these contracts Eastern Virginiarsquos
iron trade therefore relied almost completely on the federal statersquos demand for ordnance
This dependence proved tenuous when Wellfordrsquos relationship with the Navy soured in
1845 to the point that he was ordered to send back the governmentrsquos shot gauge gauge
plate and cylinders as well as any other instruments for shot inspection26
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1350 SP Adams
Wellford found making shot for the Navy to be a financially rewarding endeavour
even as it carried risks In a memorandum written into his account book he justified a
$344450 commission or 5 on his Navy contract in 1843 for lsquofurnishing the required
security and taking the contract in my name for better or for worsersquo lsquoThis contract I gave
the furnace of the advantage ofrsquo he continued lsquoand I do not hesitate to say that I could
have sold it for a profit of 10 per cent [] I would give that to day for a similar onersquo
Completing the Navyrsquos contract on 32 lb shot he argued in late 1844 kept him lsquo5 days in
the week absent from his familyrsquo and so he considered his personal charge of $122191 on
the yearrsquos receipts to be perfectly reasonable Wellford had reason to value his experience
with the Navy as he received $3226320 worth of contracts in the 1844 ndash45 fiscal year to
provide shot and shell for the Navyrsquos land-based fortifications These contracts accounted
for 272 of the Navyrsquos expenditure for this purpose and it made Wellford the single
largest naval ordnance contractor in the nation Losing this lucrative stream of income hurt
the future financial prospects of Catharine Furnace27
Rather than dwell on the failures with the Navy Wellford jumped into the manufacture
of 8 and 10 inch artillery shells and 12 and 24 lb solid shot for the US Army by signing a
$2442827 contract in 1844 He also upped his own commission to 10 arguing again
that he was remaining personally responsible for the contract lsquoThis contract I gave the
Furnace the advantage ofrsquo he argued in defence of his $241697 from the companyrsquos
account Rather than sub-contract out the work to other ironworks Wellford reminded his
partners that he planned to keep all of the Army business at Catharine Furnace He did not
lsquohesitate to say I could have sold it for a much larger advancersquo for his own personal profit
In the summer of 1844 Wellford rushed shell patterns from an armoury in Washington
and after receiving guidance from ordnance officer Colonel George Talcott was shipping
shot and shells to Fort Monroe For this job Wellford secured a favourable rate of 4 cents
for 10 inch shells 5 cents for 8 inch shells and 314 cents for 12 and 24 lb solid shot
Although the initial contract was for a little under $25000 Wellford continued to make
shot and shell for the Army well into 1846 by signing several small contracts in 1845 and a
large $1244469 order in 1846 Since Wellford upped his commission to 15 for that later
work he clearly felt that his personal stake in the army contracts merited a larger share of
the companyrsquos profits28
John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal fortunes with Catharine Furnace had finally
seemed to turn the corner By 1846 he had acquired a controlling interest in the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company by purchasing more shares in the
corporation bringing ownership stake to three-fifths Charles Dyer of Providence
moreover had recently concluded that lsquothis is as good if not the best market in the country
to dispose of all he has or may in future makersquo for Catharine Furnace pig iron Wellford
had 150 to 200 tons of pig iron on hand at the Fredericksburg wharf ready to ship out to the
Northeast Although the prospects of many Virginia charcoal iron furnaces seemed to be
on the decline in the face of Pennsylvaniarsquos anthracite ironmakers Wellfordrsquos connections
with the War Department and the suggestion of a niche market for Catharine Furnacersquos
lsquogray ironrsquo in Providence offered a glimpse of hope in late 184629
Following the outbreak of the War with Mexico Navy officials approached Wellford
about a new contract for shot and shell On 3 September 1846 the head of the Navyrsquos
Bureau of Ordnance Commodore Louis Warrington praised Wellfordrsquos past service and
in light of a shortage of shot and shell offered Wellford the opportunity to provide 10000
units of solid 32 lb shot and 7000 shells for 32 lb cannons for the Navy Wellford
responded in the positive as Commodore Warrington sent out a contract in October or
November of 1846 for his signature However Wellford never signed the contract and in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1351
late December of 1846 the residents of Fredericksburg were startled to discover that John
Spotswood Wellford the driving force behind so many social economic and political
movements in Spotsylvania County had died at the moment when Catharine Furnace
seemed on the brink of big success30
In the wake of Johnrsquos death the future direction of Catharine Furnace was in doubt
Edward Carmichael now living in Richmond attempted to assume control over Wellfordrsquos
Navy contract for 10000 32 lb shot and 7000 shells in early January 1847 As William
Wellford stalled in settling his fatherrsquos estate Carmichael argued that the Navy should
transfer the Catharine Furnace work to his authority Carmichael also undertook some
contracts to supply Army ordnance that he expected to be filled with Catharine Furnace
iron He immediately wrote to Fredericksburg asking for two or three pigs of lsquothe very best
Gray ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace to be sent to Richmond immediately so that he could
complete this contract at local forges In early February a lsquofearfulrsquo Carmichael advised
William to ship any remaining shot and shell on the Catharine Furnace grounds to Norfolk
by mid-March so as to fulfil any obligations he had to the Navy By late February William
had taken inventory of the remaining ordnance stock at Catharine Furnace and agreed to
ship the shot and shell on hand for the Army and to lsquomould the 24 lb Solid Shot and the 32
lb Sold Shot for the Navy with one workman on eachrsquo through mid-March The completion
of this final contract would be the last bit of ordnance manufacture done at Catharine
Furnace during the 1840s as William Wellford made clear in his correspondence that he
had no interest in pursuing the business further31
With John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos death then Catharine Furnacersquos future was in doubt
William Wellford Johnrsquos son became the de facto manager at the furnace although he
seemed to be a reluctant heir to this position William wrote to Edward Carmichael in early
1847 that lsquoI can by no means accept the execution of the Navy contractrsquo and that it
lsquoappears to be equally illegal for you and Mr C acting as surviving partners to undertake
itrsquo Because the Army and Navy contracted with individuals and not corporations John
Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal estate ndash not the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company ndash were the only ones authorised to complete any remaining
work Indeed the firmrsquos attorney had recently advised that William was only authorised to
continue Catharine Furnacersquos operations lsquofor the purpose of completing the execution of
any contracts which may have been entered into but not fully executed by his testator at
the time of his deathrsquo and that lsquoAt the death of Mr Wellford the partnership which existed
between himself amp others in the iron works ceased except for the purpose of completing
existing engagements and winding up the businessrsquo Only a few weeks later the trustee of
Francis Deanersquos share in the firm Richard H Cunningham announced that after several
meetings with William Wellford it was clear that he lsquohad no desire or intention of
purchasing the propertyrsquo and that the best course of action would be to liquidate the
physical assets of the corporation and ask $40000 for the lsquoEstate Fixtures and Mules (not
including any Pig Iron)rsquo By early April Fredericksburgrsquos Democratic Recorder
advertised the a June sale at auction of lsquoThe Catharine Furnace with Dwelling 4648 acres
of land containing iron ore well wooded fixtures patterns stock steam engine house
cupolas blacksmithrsquos tools ampc ampc with everything requisite for a complete iron
manufacturing establishmentrsquo32
Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
Was Catharine Furnace successful This is a difficult question to address without
understanding the early context in which the firm operated as well as its utter dependence
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1352 SP Adams
upon the personal capital of John Spotswood Wellford The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company struggled to find a reliable outlet for the products of Catharine
Furnace during its early history Local state and national trends created an unfavourable
atmosphere for starting an iron smelting operation during the late 1830s and early 1840s
John Wellford would have been well aware of his disadvantages in this regard As a longshy
time Fredericksburg resident with first-hand familiarity of the grandiose visions false
starts and frustrating stalls of local projects such as the Rappahannock Navigation
Company or the Fredericksburg and Potomac Creek Railroad Company Wellford
followed his entrepreneurial instincts into less traditional markets for ironmakers Rather
than wait for Fredericksburgrsquos prospects to magically reverse or dump his own financial
resources into a new improvement or manufacturing investment Wellford used his long
history of political and economic contacts to his firmrsquos advantage Military contracts
shifted the responsibility of success or failure into an entirely new area of risk ndash
Wellfordrsquos ability to maintain his contacts in the Navy and War departments and to spin
them into lucrative contracts for the production of shot and shell In the short term the
firmrsquos reliance upon government contracts saved Catharine Furnace and made the
operation profitable
In the long run though the dependency on John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal capital
bound the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company to its
owner and manager This was not the sort of social capital that could transfer easily to either
Johnrsquos family or his fellow incorporators In the end it was not Wellfordrsquos lack of
entrepreneurial talent that limited Catharine Furnacersquos long-term prospects but perhaps his
creative way of overcoming the various obstacles to profitable ironmaking that existed in
antebellum Virginia But just as traditional forms of financial capital need a strong
institutional environment to be effective so does social or personal capital need a
favourable context The Old Dominion for various reasons did not provide that favourable
context Wellfordrsquos case then offers an example of how his particular entrepreneurial
strategy offers up a short-term success story while at the same time exposing the difficult
context that industrial endeavours faced in the antebellum South
Local factors endemic to Fredericksburg for example played a large role in
amplifying the long-term weakness of relying upon personal rather than physical capital
for Catharine Furnace The most promising regional market Richmond essentially closed
up to Catharine Furnace pig iron by the early 1840s Once Francis Deane left the employ of
the Tredegar Company that firm failed to make massive purchases of Catharine Furnace
iron As the James River and Kanawha Canal linked the ironmakers of the Valley of
Virginia to Richmond moreover Catharine Furnace was further left out of the mix
Without the strong connections to market Wellfordrsquos successors most likely would have
continued to struggle to compete with other more integrated ironmakers In a larger sense
Fredericksburgrsquos entire manufacturing economy was being squeezed out of the picture
during the antebellum period as local boosters failed to make the necessary investments in
the regionrsquos physical infrastructure Geographer Keith Littlefield estimates that the city
lost control over 76 of the trade in its rural hinterland by 1860 as Richmond and
Alexandria expanded their commercial reach at Fredericksburgrsquos expense John
Wellfordrsquos own experience with failed turnpikes river improvements and railroads
during his pre-ironmaking days signalled a failure to secure a variety of market outlets for
Fredericksburgrsquos manufacturers Because Wellfordrsquos furnace produced pig iron ndash a high
bulk and low value commodity ndash shipping costs were a major factor in marketing its
products afar Since the cityrsquos commercial and manufacturing sector served a smaller and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
Business History 2013
Vol 55 No 8 1339ndash1360 httpdxdoiorg101080000767912012745067
The perils of personal capital in antebellum America John Spotswood Wellford and Virginiarsquos Catharine Furnace
Sean Patrick Adams
History University of Florida Gainesville Florida USA
The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Companyrsquos ironmaking facility Catharine Furnace had the look of a prime mover in antebellum Virginiarsquos industrial sector when it opened in 1838 Its manager and principal owner John Spotswood Wellford successfully tapped into his social capital to secure military ordnance contracts but in the process the firm became utterly dependent upon his ability to secure this work through personal connections By failing to expand the market for its pig iron and castings in local regional and national markets the firm relied upon these ordnance contracts for shot and shell for its existence When Wellford died in 1846 the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company collapsed A few years later Catharine Furnace stood cold and abandoned ndash a severe reminder of the limited prospects of Virginiarsquos industrial economy and the perils of relying on an individual entrepreneurrsquos personal capital during a critical period of American industrialisation
Keywords US antebellum US South Virginia entrepreneurship social capital industrialisation iron military contracting
Introduction
The prospects for ironmaking in Virginia seemed very bright in the earlymonths of 1836 as
the entire economy appeared awash with money An influx of Mexican silver engorged the
nationrsquos supply of hard currency at the same time that Andrew Jacksonrsquos lsquoslayingrsquo of the
Bank of the United States triggered a dramatic ndash and intemperate ndash expansion of bank
loans The price of basic commodities like cotton and wheat continued to press higher and
higher while land values soared Iron seemed a particularly attractive investment on
national regional and local levels1 The South and Virginia in particular were going
through a railroad building boom that would ensure a high demand for iron rails for years
In the winter of 1836ndash37 Virginia pig iron sold anywhere from $50 to $55 a ton ndash more
than double the $25 per ton that pig iron commanded in 1832 and at least $10 higher than
the average price of charcoal iron in Philadelphia lsquoThe Virginia iron industry though a
worthy pioneerrsquo historian Kathleen Bruce argued lsquohad worked with mole-like
inconspicuousnessrsquo particularly in the areas of eastern Virginia The swell in economic
activity combined with the effect of a protective tariff to create according to Bruce a new
lsquospeculative spiritrsquo after 1835 which reinvigorated interest in the Virginia iron industry2
Email spadamsufledu
q 2013 Taylor amp Francis
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1340 SP Adams
Of course the Panic of 1837 and subsequent years of a crushing economic depression ndash
the worst the United States had ever seen ndash was on the horizon but a boommentality gripped
Virginiarsquos capital In a session that saw a flurry of corporate chartering occur in Richmond
several Virginians sought to capitalise on the high-flying economy Some of them sought to
revive the semi-dormant iron industry of Eastern Virginia On 21 March 1836 the Virginia
Legislature passed an act incorporating the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Company This 20-year charter authorised the company to manufacture lsquoiron steel and
materials of the like naturersquo and allowed the ownership of up to 5000 acres of land in
Spotsylvania Stafford Orange Louisa Culpepper Rappahannock and Fauquier counties
Its five original incorporators Francis Deane John Heth John SpotswoodWellford Edward
H Carmichael and Alexander Henderson were charged with raising a capital amount
between $50000 and $150000 via shares with a par value of $100 each Although shares of
stock in the company were open for purchase by the public ownership of the firm was
divided into five equal parts This effectively meant that the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company although technically a corporation subject to public ownership
operated as a partnership between the five original incorporators This was not an altogether
unusual arrangement in the antebellum Virginia business world as it allowed for large
amounts of land and capital stock ownership without the complicated inheritance issues that
sometimes plagued limited partnerships and proprietary firms3
As one of the easternmost operations in Virginiarsquos charcoal iron industry the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company stood well positioned to serve
urban markets both to the north and south as well as the thriving city of Fredericksburg
Its manager and one of its founding incorporators John Spotswood Wellford was an
experienced and well-connected business leader with strong ties to banking internal
improvements and mining interests in the region The companyrsquos land in nearby
Spotsylvania County had abundant stocks of iron ore and charcoal-producing forests As it
was situated in the region from which many hired slaves in Western Virginiarsquos charcoal
iron industry originated Wellford enjoyed a comparative advantage over its local
competitors for securing inexpensive enslaved labour In sum the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company had the look of a prime mover in antebellum Virginiarsquos
economy and seemed poised to be a dynamic industrial firm Yet its reliance upon one
individual gave this endeavour all the disadvantages of a proprietary firm at the same time
that it ostensibly operated as a corporate firm during a time of great turmoil in the
American iron trade In the end the company known informally by its sole ironmaking
facility Catharine Furnace would demonstrate the perils of banking upon personal capital
at a time in American industrial development when corporate organisation and
investments in physical capital took precedence John Spotswood Wellford demonstrated
entrepreneurial talent in making an iron furnace work under the most difficult of market
conditions But in doing so Wellfordrsquos Catharine Furnace became a symbol of Virginia
indeed of the Upper Southrsquos failure to develop a thriving industrial sector in the decades
prior to the American Civil War
John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
The role of individual entrepreneurs in pushing industrial change in the antebellum United
States has undergone a historical revival of sorts Recent scholarship has emphasised
factors such as family connections religious and philanthropic outlooks and ideas about
class relations in reconstructing entrepreneurship during that period This follows a wider
trend among business historians Pamela Walker Laird in a special issue of this journal in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1341
2008 suggested that looking at lsquosocial capitalrsquo or the lsquoassets based on personal
connections and connectabilityrsquo can provide new insights into entrepreneurial behaviour
and success Although social capital like its more traditional counterpart does not
guarantee success or failure by its mere presence historians need to recognise those social
and cultural connections when tracing economic activity especially during times when
lsquofew other assurances of predictability reliability authority and reciprocity existrsquo This is
an especially potent point in a society just beginning to undergo industrial development
In antebellum New England for example bankers might use personal or family
connections to facilitate loans of capital to industrial endeavours and notions of
paternalistic obligations shaped factories as much as market conditions Recognising the
constant interplay of economic and social forces with this idea of social capital then has
infused the study of entrepreneurship during this period of American history when so
much about the economy was in flux with a new energy4
As scholars of the American South struggle to understand the regionrsquos distinct history
of industrial growth different variables such as soil quality climate and of course the
wider political and cultural impact of slavery all factor into the context in which southern
entrepreneurship developed Recent work from Jonathan Wells Frank Byrne and Bruce
Eelman on the development of the antebellum Southrsquos commercial class suggests that
even as they lagged behind the North in many quantitative measures of economic growth
southern merchants were very much a part of the emergent capitalist economy of the
antebellum United States The history of manufacturing in areas like the South Carolina
upcountry or northern Georgia according to recent work by Thomas Downey and Michael
Gagnon offers an example of a thriving if more modest industrial sector at work
Although this literature on the Southrsquos antebellum industrial economy has gone a long way
to discredit the notion that the region was lsquobackwardsrsquo or lsquopre-modernrsquo entrepreneurs still
struggled to facilitate industrial growth in the South So even as they might share the
reserves of social capital through personal and family connections wealth and vision of
their northern counterparts individuals like John Spotswood Wellford had to negotiate a
different and in many ways more difficult context for industrial development5
Wellfordrsquos career offers a fruitful direction to study southern entrepreneurship because
his story blends elements of both the agrarian and the industrial South ndash he enjoyed large
amounts of social capital in both worlds The son of Dr Robert Wellford a prominent
physician in Fredericksburg John Spotswood Wellford took up a career as a dry goods
merchant with contacts across the nation This work offered him many opportunities to
cultivate business contacts in the North and he travelled far and wide in the pursuit of
them In 1819 his father noted that John returned to Fredericksburg safe lsquofrom the
prevalent disease of Northern Cities ndash and the dangers of the boisterous winds when
traveling broad watersrsquo After he became prosperous John settled into the traditional
southern investments in land and slaves In addition to his well-appointed house in
Fredericksburg Wellford owned 1357 acres in Spotsylvania County valued at $4507873
on which he would build a country residence and farm His land as he soon discovered
contained rich deposits of iron ore Spotswood also owned at least 24 slaves five of whom
resided in the Fredericksburg house and 19 in his Spotsylvania estate As a member of the
Fredericksburg Agricultural Society John Wellford served on a committee to promote
innovations in planting and animal husbandry through exhibitions and fairs He also
participated in Fredericksburgrsquos Agricultural Society Show and Fair where he sat on
several prize committees His own agricultural pursuits won him honours for the lsquoBest
Fatted Work Oxenrsquo and lsquoBest Grass-Fed Beefrsquo in 1835 and five years later took home the
award for the best turnips in the region6
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1342 SP Adams
Although he was a wealthy farmer slaveholder and a leading member of
Fredericksburg society John Spotswood Wellford developed political contacts that
aligned him with the Whig Party He first tested the political waters as a founding member
of Fredericksburgrsquos Anti-Jackson Committee in 1827 When Henry Clay visited
Fredericksburg a year later he received well-wishers and political aspirants at Wellfordrsquos
house Wellford followed Clay into the Whig Party where he served as a prominent figure
in Spotsylvania Countyrsquos local party apparatus In 1834 he participated prominently in a
convention that denounced President Jacksonrsquos removal of federal deposits from the Bank
of the United States chaired several Spotsylvania County Whig Party meetings and
headlined a formal request that Henry Clay come to Fredericksburg to do a lsquopublic
entertainmentrsquo in 1840 He joined the Fredericksburg Auxiliary to the American
Colonization Society in 1826 and served as a manager for several years Despite his
affiliation with the ACSrsquos mild form of anti-slavery John owned slaves throughout his
life In 1835 he was named to a committee to explore lsquomeasures necessary to be adopted
in regard to the movements making in the Northern States with respect to the Abolition of
Slaveryrsquo Apparently mild anti-slavery initiatives sat well with John Spotswood Wellford
but any immediate threats to the lsquopeculiar institutionrsquo provoked an urgent response
His brother and close business associate Beverly soon thereafter joined the
Fredericksburg Anti-Abolition Committee7
Wellford needed help from outside Virginia in order to develop his landrsquos industrial
potential He found investment capital difficult to come by in Fredericksburg even though
he served on the Bank of Virginiarsquos board for many years John Majewski has
demonstrated that elsewhere in Virginia a similar dearth of investment capital for canal
and railroad development forced the state to subsidise ndash often poorly ndash the growth of the
Old Dominionrsquos transportation infrastructure Instead of state subsidies Wellford tried to
use his social capital here in the form of some northern contacts to develop the industrial
resources of his landholdings He wrote to the Philadelphia merchant and ironmaster
Samuel G Wright in 1823 touting the richness of Spotsylvania Countyrsquos ore deposits
After sending Wright a sample he wrote that lsquoI am informed the land abounds with it it is
to be found in great quantities of the same quality sent you and that near the surfacersquo
Wellford reported that the tract for sale was lsquoabout ten miles on a turnpike road from this
place to the land I understand the tract is a large one and for sale the land is generally very
poor and consequently may be purchased cheaprsquo and offered to lsquosend you a few Tons of
the ore where you could better judge of the propriety of working the purchasersquo Nearly four
years later Wellford still offered hopes that Wright would invest in ore mining Even
though he inadvertently revealed the lack of indigenous investment in Spotsylvania ore
fields by claiming lsquothere is no fear of competition so you will lose nothing by a little
delayrsquo Wellford hoped to secure Wrightrsquos partnership Neither overture resulted in a land
purchase and the quest for northern investment in Spotsylvania County failed8
Internal improvements in the region formed as one of John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos true
passions as he was involved personally in a number of projects over a number of years
Yet like his quest for northern investment in ore land Wellfordrsquos dreams of integrating
Fredericksburg within the nationrsquos growing transportation network never really came to
pass Plans for improving the Rappahannock River in order to link Fredericksburgrsquos
tidewater port to upriver markets date back to the late eighteenth century and by 1811 the
Virginia Legislature commissioned the Rappahannock Company to oversee the lsquoopening
clearing and extending the inland navigationrsquo of the river In 1816 state officials
commissioned an official survey of the route but these ambitious plans stalled Wellford
was a director of a later version of this firm called the RappahannockNavigation Company
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1343
which received corporate charters from the state in 1826 and 1828 Johnrsquos warehouse held
the lumber ready for the construction of locks he advertised for lsquo10 or fifteen able bodied
negro menrsquo to work on the project and at a groundbreaking ceremony offered a toast in
praise of the Virginia Board of Public Works lsquoThe fund of Internal Improvement ndash the
State helps those who help themselvesrsquo These ambitious plans again ran into trouble as
company officials deemed the Rappahannock navigation inadequate by 18369 In 1831
Wellford was unanimously elected secretary and treasurer of the Fredericksburg and
Potomac Company a firm that sought to build a turnpike then railroad linking the city to a
steamboat landing on Potomac Creek Although the founders predicted their system could
carry merchandise from Fredericksburg to Baltimore in 10 hours or less this plan also
failed to materialise A year later he helped secure a charter for the Fredericksburg and
Potomac Creek Railroad Company which apparently failed to attract enough stock
subscriptions Finally in 1835 John agreed to serve as a manager of the Rappahannock and
Blue Ridge Railroad yet another plan that failed to come to fruition10
All of these unfinished projects must have been frustrating for John Spotswood
Wellford Although he remained a prominent public figure in Fredericksburg an
upstanding member of the Presbyterian Church the anchor of a well-respected and
influential family and a successful banker and merchant his attempts to bring industrial
prosperity to his home town seemed mired in mediocrity So while he maintained a web of
contacts in these social economic and political circles this social capital was somewhat
limited in its efficacy In many ways he developed lsquopersonalrsquo rather than lsquosocialrsquo capital
as his various connections with fellow landholders Whigs and internal improvement
boosters did not translate into real change in the region even as they marked him
individually as one of the leading advocates of industrial development in the
Fredericksburg area This was reflected by Wellfordrsquos rather unconventional role as the
scion of a wealthy Virginia family he owned land but seemed more interested in
cultivating its iron ore than coaxing tobacco or wheat out of the ground Wellford owned
slaves but also belonged to an anti-slavery society He came from a well-connected and
affluent Fredericksburg family but sought to make connections with northern investors
and merchants throughout his career Like many entrepreneurs across history John
Spotswood Wellford demonstrated a willingness to break from the expected trajectory of
his life ndash he wanted to use his personal capital for material gain In 1836 he would get that
chance during the short-lived boom in the Virginia charcoal iron trade
The birth of Catharine Furnace
lsquoThe construction of the hearth is a business in which the founder takes an active partrsquo
Frederick Overman wrote in the 1854 version of his extensive guidebook The Manufacture
of Iron in All its Various Branches As the furnace superintendent drawing an annual salary
of $1000 John Spotswood Wellford undoubtedly involved himself in the early
construction and operation of the furnace First and foremost he gave the furnace its
distinctive name lsquoCatharinersquo after his mother Catharine Yates Wellford But perhaps
more importantly Wellford kept a careful account of the cost of labour and materials that
went into the making of Catharine Furnace This account book provides an invaluable
insight into the furnace operation Wellfordrsquos entries shown in Figure 1 were terse in the
fashion of most nineteenth-century business account books Nonetheless these entries
provide a narrative history of both the day-to-day and long-term goals of the enterprise
Even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company was a corporate
endeavour John Spotswood Wellford ran the business much like a proprietary owner
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1344 SP Adams
Figure 1 Typical page of John Wellfordrsquos Catharine Furnace Account Book Source Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC)
By the end of 1837 the construction tab had run to a little more than $7000 When coupled
with the cost of acquiring land for charcoaling and mining ore this put Catharine Furnace
well within the cost range of the average Virginia charcoal furnace but much beyond the
range of most individual proprietors11
Iron furnaces were usually lsquoblown inrsquo in the early spring so it was important that
Catharine Furnace be completed in the winter of 1837ndash38 By early January a set of hearth
stones had been delivered to the site for inside lining of the furnace the final brickwork on
the furnace was being completed and the furnacersquos lsquosuction enginersquo (most likely a steam
engine for operating the furnace bellows) had been repaired and was ready for use
A sizeable work force of at least 86 slaves was in place with 19 slaves allocated to work in
various ore mines in the area Although no official production figures are extant Wellfordrsquos
account book notes that by May of 1838 the first shipment of iron was hauled away from
the area The shipment of new hearth stones in late September signalled a successful first
blast as furnace linings often wore away as workers continually fed the blast12
Making the iron was only one facet of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Companyrsquos business how they could transport their goods to market was an entirely
different struggle Overland travel was the simplest and most common option but also the
most expensive Virginiarsquos charcoal iron operations needed to be located near ample
supplies of ore and timber which usually meant they were in sparsely populated areas
When Rockbridge Countyrsquos William Weaver sought to expand his iron manufacturing
business in 1826 he purposely located his new forge close to his blast furnace so as to
minimise the distance that the heavy iron pigs would travel in wagons or carts The Union
Forge in Patrick County paid $8 per ton to ship its iron only a short distance to market
In this regard Catharine Furnacersquos close proximity to Fredericksburg and its flat terrain
gave it an advantage over other Virginia charcoal iron furnaces the majority of which were
located in the mountainous counties in theValley ofVirginia The Swift RunGap Turnpike
commonly known as the Orange Turnpike served as Spotsylvania Countyrsquos major road
project The arearsquos distinctive red clay in the words of one historian was lsquosticky as fish glue
when wetrsquo and caked aroundwagon wheels Conditions on this road were so bad moreover
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1345
that in 1823 a lawsuit found the company negligent of regular repair and maintenance
Hauling iron in these conditions could be done over short distances only which ruled out
most overland routes for shipping iron from Spotsylvania County13
Whenever possible Virginia ironmakers shipped their products to market via natural
or improved waterways William Weaverrsquos placement of his new forge in 1826 sought to
reduce overland shipping costs but also put manufacturing iron within easy distance of the
North River where flat-bottomed boats could ship directly to major market centres When
the James River and Kanawha Canal reached the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains at
Lynchburg in 1840 the ironmakers of the Valley saw a dramatic reduction in
transportation costs to Richmond Even though John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos dream of easy
water navigation on the upper Rappahannock failed to materialise Fredericksburg still
served as an important link to the eastern seaboard via its tidewater port An 1835 guide to
Virginia referred to Fredericksburg as a lsquoprosperous portrsquo and noted that its wharves could
handle vessels up to 140 tons Local officials felt that they could have more support in
developing seaborne traffic from their state and federal governments In 1836 citizens
petitioned Congress to make Fredericksburg an official port of entry ndash ships had to pay
collection duties at Tappahannock 60 miles lower on the Rappahannock River ndash arguing
that this has caused lsquogreat trouble expense and inconveniencersquo to their merchants
Nonetheless iron could be shipped by water out of Fredericksburg at a fraction of the cost
of land transport and this would remain the major outlet for Wellfordrsquos iron business
throughout the antebellum period14
Fredericksburgrsquos connection to Virginiarsquos railway network was provided by the
Richmond Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad Company Chartered in 1834 this
railroad at first contained a rare and controversial clause that gave it the exclusive rights to
build a rail line between Richmond and Washington DC The Supreme Court struck down
this clause but the RFampP nonetheless served as the major north ndash south artery for eastern
Virginia by linking Fredericksburg to Richmond in 1837 The RFampP later built a branch to
Aquia Creek in 1842 which connected Fredericksburg to Washington DC via steamboat
Unfortunately many of these transportation projects were limited at the time Wellford
turned to iron manufacturing as the many failures in the regionrsquos internal improvements
kept Fredericksburg on the margins of Virginiarsquos budding industrial economy
One geographer notes that as Alexandria expanded from the north and Richmond
extended from the south by 1835 Fredericksburg lsquodid not reflect a tightly integrated
settlement system and this pervasive weakness highlighted the fragile underpinnings of the
local economyrsquo15
Despite the unsteady connections to market John Spotswood Wellford successfully
brought Catharine Furnace into producing iron in short order Unfortunately the price of
iron plunged right at the time that the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Company started selling it The economic downturn on the heels of the Panic of 1837
pushed iron prices to about half ndash $25 to $22 a ton ndash the level that they had been in the
previous year Luckily the company had a number of close ties with potential customers
$140080 worth of Catharine Furnace pig iron went to the Fredericksburg Union
Manufacturing Company in 1838 and another $111800 in the following year Undoubtedly
the presence of two Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company stockholders
William Crump and Edward Carmichael on the board of this local firm helped close that
sale Wellfordrsquos account book suggests that most of Catharine Furnacersquos initial production
made its way to the Tredegar Iron Company in Richmond where it would have most likely
been made into bar rails in Tredegarrsquos new rolling mill As Francis Deane served as both a
major stockholder in the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1346 SP Adams
the President of the Tredegar Iron Company the purchase of $2500 ndash or 55 of Catharine
Furnacersquos sales in 1838 ndash worth of pig iron benefited both firms16
John hoped to reach markets outside the Old Dominion in Catharine Furnacersquos initial
years of iron production His years spent working the dry goods trade in the North offered
some contacts his extensive family connections offered other potential forms of social
capital While his younger brother Charles Carter Wellford was in New York City on
business in 1838 John shipped a sample of Catharine Furnace iron for testing in that
market The iron must have answered relatively well as Wood Johnston amp Burritt a dry
goods firm in New York City with ties to Richmond Virginia purchased $22818 worth of
iron from Wellford that same year Three years later Wood Johnston and Burritt sold
another $116729 worth of Catharine Furnace iron shipped to them via the schooner
Andrew Browne The only other out-of-state customer in 1838 was CG Morris of
Charleston South Carolina who purchased $22818 worth of pig iron and sash weights
from Wellford17
The quest for new markets continued over the next few years with varying levels of
success In February of 1839 Wellford sold two tons of iron to a customer in the District of
Columbia No additional entries appear for this particular buyer so it seems that Catharine
Furnace iron did not take off in the Washington area That same year Wellford shipped six
tons of pig iron to Boston at $2751 per ton The New England market seemed a bit more
promising as Wellford received $291568 in sales from Charles Dyer of Providence
This was most likely pig iron for use by the Phoenix Iron Foundry Company a Providence
firm that manufactured various finished iron products such as gear wheels and specialised
machine tools In 1841 Wellford noted in his account book that lsquoiron was taken to
Portland to try the marketrsquo by Captain Freeman Smith and that Smith sold at least three
tons at $2632 per ton in Maine18
In its early years the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company exploited
Francis Deanersquos high position in Tredegar Iron Company thus making personal
connections between the incorporators essential to the firmrsquos early survival Deane had
been present in the creation of many Virginia ironworks and his personal connections in the
state trade were unparalleled In 1839 alone Tredegar purchased $16500 ndash probably over
500 tons worth ndash of iron from Catharine Furnace As an incorporator of the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company Deane had the opportunity to enrich both his
primary employer as well as his Fredericksburg investment by purchasing pig iron from
Catharine Furnace The following year however sales to Tredegar slowed to $3500 and no
more major transactions between the two companies occurred after 1840 This was in part
due to the financial problems suffered by the TredegarWorks and in particular the result of
Deanersquos inability to sell the firmrsquos products By 1841 the fortunes of the Tredegar Works
were in the words of Kathleen Bruce at a very lsquolow ebbrsquo and Deane was on his way out as
the companyrsquos chief executive the following year Tredegarrsquos ties with Fredericksburg
continued after Deanersquos departure Joseph Reid Anderson contacted John Spotswood
Wellford in the summer of 1841 to inquire about introducing Tredegar iron in
Fredericksburg Apparently the two had discussed the project in Washington DC and
Anderson offered Wellford work as an agent of the Tredegar Iron Works lsquoFrom the prices
paid as I understand and quantity of country iron shipped there from [Richmond]rsquo
Andersonwrote lsquoas well as the high character of the Tred Iron at present I am led to believe
that advantage to all concerned may accrue from its introduction into that marketrsquo Some
Catharine Furnace iron was sold out of Tredegarrsquos yard in Richmond as David J Burr amp
Co purchased seventeen tons in 1841 found that load wanting in quality and so asked
Wellford to replace the iron In the summer of 1845 a manager at Tredegar offered to
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1347
purchase 60 or 70 tons of lsquohigh and mottled Pig Ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace at the
relatively high rate of $28 per ton19
Making shot and shell for Washington
Following Deanersquos departure from Richmond the future of Catharine Furnace was even
more in the hands of John Spotswood Wellford In a sense he used this turn of events to
turn his individual connections ndash in this case much more lsquopersonalrsquo than lsquosocialrsquo capital ndash
to the benefit of his ironmaking business In 1841 Wellford increased his individual
ownership in the company to a little over 40 through the purchase of a controlling
amount of capital stock from one of the original incorporators His son William Wellford
also held Edward Carmichaelrsquos share in trust thus giving the Wellford family functional
command over the firm as they controlled 60 of the corporation The first three full years
of operation at Catharine Furnace had seen sales totals of $450191 in 1838 $18376 in
1839 and $677568 in 1840 ndash a total combined revenue of $2965359 Revenues thus
lagged well behind the accumulated operating costs of the furnace that had run to
$6874891 by 1840 Figure 2 shows this trend Clearly a new business strategy was
needed in order to make this endeavour work as Catharine Furnace had difficulties
breaking into various private markets In the summer of 1841 John Spotswood Wellford
Francis Deane and Edward Carmichael all travelled to Washington DC to seek ordnance
contracts from the United States War Department Like its earlier connections with
Tredegar the firmrsquos directors sought to turn their social capital into financial success 20
As it turns out contracting with the federal government suited Catharine Furnace quite
well so long as John Spotswood Wellford was in charge Ordnance contracts were
arranged between the War or Navy departments and individuals so the status and
reputation of an individual contractor weighed heavy on the process On 11 September
1841 Wellford signed a contract with the Navy to deliver 70000 rounds of 32 lb solid
shot at three cents a pound to Gosport Naval Yard in Norfolk Virginia The contract came
Figure 2 Estimates of operating costs and sales at Catharine Furnace 1837 ndash 46 Source Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1348 SP Adams
into force on 2 February 1842 with the final delivery of shot taking place by 31 January
1844 Pending inspection and satisfaction by the Navy Wellford would receive $67200
from the federal government In the spring of 1842 Catharine Furnace obtained shot
patterns from James Walker That summer at least five moulders William H Ferguson
William Pulham R Parker Nicholas Wharton and A Sutherland were hard at work
making 32 lb solid shot from Catharine Furnace iron and in June of 1842 Wellford sent
his first shipment of 5230 shot to Norfolk Naval records indicate that the ordnance officers
at Gosport received over 24000 shot by the end of 1842 Shipments tended to occur fairly
regularly and Catharine Furnace produced an impressive amount of ordnance in a
relatively short period of time as illustrated in Table 1 Assuming that each piece of 32 lb
solid shot actually weighed 32 pounds ndash an assumption that did not always hold true for
nineteenth-century naval ordnance ndash then the estimated value of Wellfordrsquos contract in
1842 alone was roughly $232089621
On the surface Catharine Furnacersquos success with military contracting put the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company on a strong trajectory With the
federal government providing a strong income stream Wellford might have parlayed his
success in ordnance into wider markets for his iron Historians of technology have
provided many examples in which antebellum military enterprise helped reorganise and
refine production techniques in northern government installations like the armouries at
Springfield Massachusetts and Philadelphia as well as with private contractors like
Connecticutrsquos Samuel Colt Virginiarsquos Harpers Ferry Armory exhibited a less than
exemplary record with regard to streamlining the production of muskets and small arms
But in the end even isolated Harpers Ferry entered the modern industrial age So at least
among northern industries military enterprise was in the words of Merritt Roe Smith a
lsquokey ingredient in the evolution of complex technological systemsrsquo and served as a critical
factor in that regionrsquos antebellum industrialisation22
Rather than diversify its production line or markets Catharine Furnacersquos manager
expanded further into the highly volatile ordnance trade Using his personal connections
with the Navy Wellford secured yet another contract for 70000 32 lb solid shot in
February of 1843 The terms of the contract were the same as the 1841 deal although this
time Wellford had less than a year to complete it Since he shipped only about a third of
this amount from Catharine Furnace in 1842 it is questionable whether or not Wellford
expected to produce all of the contracted shot at his own works It was not uncommon for
contractors even if they owned or operated an iron furnace themselves to sub-contract
Table 1 32 lb solid shot shipped to Gosport naval yard from Catharine Furnace 1842
Amount Received Estimated Value ($)
22 June 1842 5250 504000 22 June 1842 2623 251808 18 July 1842 3507 336672 4 August 1842 1692 162432 20 August 1842 2227 213792 8 September 1842 2102 201792 22 September 1842 1401 134496 3 October 1842 1874 179904 3 November 1842 3500 336000 Total 24176 2320896
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1349
production out to other firms at times In fact Wellford notes in his account book that 118
tons of pig iron shipped from the Fredericksburg wharf to Catharine Furnace in 1842 to be
melted into ball in his cupola furnaces Whether or not he had purchased this iron from
other furnaces or recalled it from pig iron meant for sale elsewhere is unclear But a year
later Wellford paid for 55 cartloads or 275 tons of pig iron from the Fredericksburg
wharf back to Catharine Furnace noting that this iron had been sent back from Boston
unsold lsquoon acct of its being so whitersquo and lsquowas therefore worked into ballrsquo23
Producing shot for the Navy secured a solid stream of income for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as a steady demand for iron for the
workers at Catharine Furnace These ordnance contracts required constant vigilance
however as Wellford visited Washington DC on numerous occasions to maintain his
personal connections with the War Department He also paid William Ridgely $8500 lsquofor
arranging accts and settling with [the] Naval Boardrsquo in 1842 Ridgely was a long-time
employee of the Navy who had been the Chief Clerk of the Naval Commissioners until
September of 1842 when he took a new position as Chief Clerk to the Bureau of Navy
Yards and Docks Sporadic payments to Ridgely ranging from $2000 to $10000
continued over the next few years but Wellfordrsquos entries do not give a full account of the
services rendered to him It is likely that Wellfordrsquos various contacts in Washington
provided him with valuable information When he learned that a Baltimore firm had failed
to supply 5000 cannon shot and that inspection officials had rejected 5000 additional units
Wellford wrote to Commodore WM Crane to see if he could provide any information
about securing a contract for himself to make up the 10000 in lost shot to the Navy24
Wellford also tried to squeeze larger profit margins out of the contract by rearranging
one of Catharine Furnacersquos great economic disadvantages ndash its high cost of transportation
The 1843 contract for example had an allowance of $2 per ton from Catharine Furnace to
Fredericksburg and another $1 per ton from Fredericksburg to Gosport In March of 1843
a naval official informed Wellford that lsquoafter reciting the price to be given for the shot
transportation to Fredericksburg and freight that no other allowance is to be madersquo for
shipping shot to Norfolk Whether or not the inspection of the ordnance occurred at
the furnace or at the naval yard was another factor in making contracts profitable Shot
and shell that was rejected at Catharine Furnace could be recast cheaply on the spot
rejected ordnance at Gosport needed to be shipped back to the furnace at the companyrsquos
expense Shipments to Gosport in the summer of 1843 were delayed by late arrival of an
inspection officer to Fredericksburg Some years later Wellford complained to the Navy
that their insistence upon inspections at the yard increased his already prohibitive
transportation costs25
Needless to say Wellford found ordnance a lucrative business for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company By 1843 Wellfordrsquos contracts with the War
Department were providing nearly all of Catharine Furnacersquos income This strategy
carried some risk as Wellford lost out on a contract to provide shot and shell for the Navy
in 1844 This contract went to the Tredegar Company now under the leadership of Joseph
Reid Anderson and making not only basic ordnance like shot and shell but also casting
cannon for the Federal government Like Catharine Furnace Tredegar drew upon strong
personal connections to Washington officials to secure these contracts Eastern Virginiarsquos
iron trade therefore relied almost completely on the federal statersquos demand for ordnance
This dependence proved tenuous when Wellfordrsquos relationship with the Navy soured in
1845 to the point that he was ordered to send back the governmentrsquos shot gauge gauge
plate and cylinders as well as any other instruments for shot inspection26
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1350 SP Adams
Wellford found making shot for the Navy to be a financially rewarding endeavour
even as it carried risks In a memorandum written into his account book he justified a
$344450 commission or 5 on his Navy contract in 1843 for lsquofurnishing the required
security and taking the contract in my name for better or for worsersquo lsquoThis contract I gave
the furnace of the advantage ofrsquo he continued lsquoand I do not hesitate to say that I could
have sold it for a profit of 10 per cent [] I would give that to day for a similar onersquo
Completing the Navyrsquos contract on 32 lb shot he argued in late 1844 kept him lsquo5 days in
the week absent from his familyrsquo and so he considered his personal charge of $122191 on
the yearrsquos receipts to be perfectly reasonable Wellford had reason to value his experience
with the Navy as he received $3226320 worth of contracts in the 1844 ndash45 fiscal year to
provide shot and shell for the Navyrsquos land-based fortifications These contracts accounted
for 272 of the Navyrsquos expenditure for this purpose and it made Wellford the single
largest naval ordnance contractor in the nation Losing this lucrative stream of income hurt
the future financial prospects of Catharine Furnace27
Rather than dwell on the failures with the Navy Wellford jumped into the manufacture
of 8 and 10 inch artillery shells and 12 and 24 lb solid shot for the US Army by signing a
$2442827 contract in 1844 He also upped his own commission to 10 arguing again
that he was remaining personally responsible for the contract lsquoThis contract I gave the
Furnace the advantage ofrsquo he argued in defence of his $241697 from the companyrsquos
account Rather than sub-contract out the work to other ironworks Wellford reminded his
partners that he planned to keep all of the Army business at Catharine Furnace He did not
lsquohesitate to say I could have sold it for a much larger advancersquo for his own personal profit
In the summer of 1844 Wellford rushed shell patterns from an armoury in Washington
and after receiving guidance from ordnance officer Colonel George Talcott was shipping
shot and shells to Fort Monroe For this job Wellford secured a favourable rate of 4 cents
for 10 inch shells 5 cents for 8 inch shells and 314 cents for 12 and 24 lb solid shot
Although the initial contract was for a little under $25000 Wellford continued to make
shot and shell for the Army well into 1846 by signing several small contracts in 1845 and a
large $1244469 order in 1846 Since Wellford upped his commission to 15 for that later
work he clearly felt that his personal stake in the army contracts merited a larger share of
the companyrsquos profits28
John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal fortunes with Catharine Furnace had finally
seemed to turn the corner By 1846 he had acquired a controlling interest in the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company by purchasing more shares in the
corporation bringing ownership stake to three-fifths Charles Dyer of Providence
moreover had recently concluded that lsquothis is as good if not the best market in the country
to dispose of all he has or may in future makersquo for Catharine Furnace pig iron Wellford
had 150 to 200 tons of pig iron on hand at the Fredericksburg wharf ready to ship out to the
Northeast Although the prospects of many Virginia charcoal iron furnaces seemed to be
on the decline in the face of Pennsylvaniarsquos anthracite ironmakers Wellfordrsquos connections
with the War Department and the suggestion of a niche market for Catharine Furnacersquos
lsquogray ironrsquo in Providence offered a glimpse of hope in late 184629
Following the outbreak of the War with Mexico Navy officials approached Wellford
about a new contract for shot and shell On 3 September 1846 the head of the Navyrsquos
Bureau of Ordnance Commodore Louis Warrington praised Wellfordrsquos past service and
in light of a shortage of shot and shell offered Wellford the opportunity to provide 10000
units of solid 32 lb shot and 7000 shells for 32 lb cannons for the Navy Wellford
responded in the positive as Commodore Warrington sent out a contract in October or
November of 1846 for his signature However Wellford never signed the contract and in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1351
late December of 1846 the residents of Fredericksburg were startled to discover that John
Spotswood Wellford the driving force behind so many social economic and political
movements in Spotsylvania County had died at the moment when Catharine Furnace
seemed on the brink of big success30
In the wake of Johnrsquos death the future direction of Catharine Furnace was in doubt
Edward Carmichael now living in Richmond attempted to assume control over Wellfordrsquos
Navy contract for 10000 32 lb shot and 7000 shells in early January 1847 As William
Wellford stalled in settling his fatherrsquos estate Carmichael argued that the Navy should
transfer the Catharine Furnace work to his authority Carmichael also undertook some
contracts to supply Army ordnance that he expected to be filled with Catharine Furnace
iron He immediately wrote to Fredericksburg asking for two or three pigs of lsquothe very best
Gray ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace to be sent to Richmond immediately so that he could
complete this contract at local forges In early February a lsquofearfulrsquo Carmichael advised
William to ship any remaining shot and shell on the Catharine Furnace grounds to Norfolk
by mid-March so as to fulfil any obligations he had to the Navy By late February William
had taken inventory of the remaining ordnance stock at Catharine Furnace and agreed to
ship the shot and shell on hand for the Army and to lsquomould the 24 lb Solid Shot and the 32
lb Sold Shot for the Navy with one workman on eachrsquo through mid-March The completion
of this final contract would be the last bit of ordnance manufacture done at Catharine
Furnace during the 1840s as William Wellford made clear in his correspondence that he
had no interest in pursuing the business further31
With John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos death then Catharine Furnacersquos future was in doubt
William Wellford Johnrsquos son became the de facto manager at the furnace although he
seemed to be a reluctant heir to this position William wrote to Edward Carmichael in early
1847 that lsquoI can by no means accept the execution of the Navy contractrsquo and that it
lsquoappears to be equally illegal for you and Mr C acting as surviving partners to undertake
itrsquo Because the Army and Navy contracted with individuals and not corporations John
Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal estate ndash not the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company ndash were the only ones authorised to complete any remaining
work Indeed the firmrsquos attorney had recently advised that William was only authorised to
continue Catharine Furnacersquos operations lsquofor the purpose of completing the execution of
any contracts which may have been entered into but not fully executed by his testator at
the time of his deathrsquo and that lsquoAt the death of Mr Wellford the partnership which existed
between himself amp others in the iron works ceased except for the purpose of completing
existing engagements and winding up the businessrsquo Only a few weeks later the trustee of
Francis Deanersquos share in the firm Richard H Cunningham announced that after several
meetings with William Wellford it was clear that he lsquohad no desire or intention of
purchasing the propertyrsquo and that the best course of action would be to liquidate the
physical assets of the corporation and ask $40000 for the lsquoEstate Fixtures and Mules (not
including any Pig Iron)rsquo By early April Fredericksburgrsquos Democratic Recorder
advertised the a June sale at auction of lsquoThe Catharine Furnace with Dwelling 4648 acres
of land containing iron ore well wooded fixtures patterns stock steam engine house
cupolas blacksmithrsquos tools ampc ampc with everything requisite for a complete iron
manufacturing establishmentrsquo32
Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
Was Catharine Furnace successful This is a difficult question to address without
understanding the early context in which the firm operated as well as its utter dependence
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1352 SP Adams
upon the personal capital of John Spotswood Wellford The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company struggled to find a reliable outlet for the products of Catharine
Furnace during its early history Local state and national trends created an unfavourable
atmosphere for starting an iron smelting operation during the late 1830s and early 1840s
John Wellford would have been well aware of his disadvantages in this regard As a longshy
time Fredericksburg resident with first-hand familiarity of the grandiose visions false
starts and frustrating stalls of local projects such as the Rappahannock Navigation
Company or the Fredericksburg and Potomac Creek Railroad Company Wellford
followed his entrepreneurial instincts into less traditional markets for ironmakers Rather
than wait for Fredericksburgrsquos prospects to magically reverse or dump his own financial
resources into a new improvement or manufacturing investment Wellford used his long
history of political and economic contacts to his firmrsquos advantage Military contracts
shifted the responsibility of success or failure into an entirely new area of risk ndash
Wellfordrsquos ability to maintain his contacts in the Navy and War departments and to spin
them into lucrative contracts for the production of shot and shell In the short term the
firmrsquos reliance upon government contracts saved Catharine Furnace and made the
operation profitable
In the long run though the dependency on John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal capital
bound the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company to its
owner and manager This was not the sort of social capital that could transfer easily to either
Johnrsquos family or his fellow incorporators In the end it was not Wellfordrsquos lack of
entrepreneurial talent that limited Catharine Furnacersquos long-term prospects but perhaps his
creative way of overcoming the various obstacles to profitable ironmaking that existed in
antebellum Virginia But just as traditional forms of financial capital need a strong
institutional environment to be effective so does social or personal capital need a
favourable context The Old Dominion for various reasons did not provide that favourable
context Wellfordrsquos case then offers an example of how his particular entrepreneurial
strategy offers up a short-term success story while at the same time exposing the difficult
context that industrial endeavours faced in the antebellum South
Local factors endemic to Fredericksburg for example played a large role in
amplifying the long-term weakness of relying upon personal rather than physical capital
for Catharine Furnace The most promising regional market Richmond essentially closed
up to Catharine Furnace pig iron by the early 1840s Once Francis Deane left the employ of
the Tredegar Company that firm failed to make massive purchases of Catharine Furnace
iron As the James River and Kanawha Canal linked the ironmakers of the Valley of
Virginia to Richmond moreover Catharine Furnace was further left out of the mix
Without the strong connections to market Wellfordrsquos successors most likely would have
continued to struggle to compete with other more integrated ironmakers In a larger sense
Fredericksburgrsquos entire manufacturing economy was being squeezed out of the picture
during the antebellum period as local boosters failed to make the necessary investments in
the regionrsquos physical infrastructure Geographer Keith Littlefield estimates that the city
lost control over 76 of the trade in its rural hinterland by 1860 as Richmond and
Alexandria expanded their commercial reach at Fredericksburgrsquos expense John
Wellfordrsquos own experience with failed turnpikes river improvements and railroads
during his pre-ironmaking days signalled a failure to secure a variety of market outlets for
Fredericksburgrsquos manufacturers Because Wellfordrsquos furnace produced pig iron ndash a high
bulk and low value commodity ndash shipping costs were a major factor in marketing its
products afar Since the cityrsquos commercial and manufacturing sector served a smaller and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
1340 SP Adams
Of course the Panic of 1837 and subsequent years of a crushing economic depression ndash
the worst the United States had ever seen ndash was on the horizon but a boommentality gripped
Virginiarsquos capital In a session that saw a flurry of corporate chartering occur in Richmond
several Virginians sought to capitalise on the high-flying economy Some of them sought to
revive the semi-dormant iron industry of Eastern Virginia On 21 March 1836 the Virginia
Legislature passed an act incorporating the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Company This 20-year charter authorised the company to manufacture lsquoiron steel and
materials of the like naturersquo and allowed the ownership of up to 5000 acres of land in
Spotsylvania Stafford Orange Louisa Culpepper Rappahannock and Fauquier counties
Its five original incorporators Francis Deane John Heth John SpotswoodWellford Edward
H Carmichael and Alexander Henderson were charged with raising a capital amount
between $50000 and $150000 via shares with a par value of $100 each Although shares of
stock in the company were open for purchase by the public ownership of the firm was
divided into five equal parts This effectively meant that the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company although technically a corporation subject to public ownership
operated as a partnership between the five original incorporators This was not an altogether
unusual arrangement in the antebellum Virginia business world as it allowed for large
amounts of land and capital stock ownership without the complicated inheritance issues that
sometimes plagued limited partnerships and proprietary firms3
As one of the easternmost operations in Virginiarsquos charcoal iron industry the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company stood well positioned to serve
urban markets both to the north and south as well as the thriving city of Fredericksburg
Its manager and one of its founding incorporators John Spotswood Wellford was an
experienced and well-connected business leader with strong ties to banking internal
improvements and mining interests in the region The companyrsquos land in nearby
Spotsylvania County had abundant stocks of iron ore and charcoal-producing forests As it
was situated in the region from which many hired slaves in Western Virginiarsquos charcoal
iron industry originated Wellford enjoyed a comparative advantage over its local
competitors for securing inexpensive enslaved labour In sum the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company had the look of a prime mover in antebellum Virginiarsquos
economy and seemed poised to be a dynamic industrial firm Yet its reliance upon one
individual gave this endeavour all the disadvantages of a proprietary firm at the same time
that it ostensibly operated as a corporate firm during a time of great turmoil in the
American iron trade In the end the company known informally by its sole ironmaking
facility Catharine Furnace would demonstrate the perils of banking upon personal capital
at a time in American industrial development when corporate organisation and
investments in physical capital took precedence John Spotswood Wellford demonstrated
entrepreneurial talent in making an iron furnace work under the most difficult of market
conditions But in doing so Wellfordrsquos Catharine Furnace became a symbol of Virginia
indeed of the Upper Southrsquos failure to develop a thriving industrial sector in the decades
prior to the American Civil War
John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
The role of individual entrepreneurs in pushing industrial change in the antebellum United
States has undergone a historical revival of sorts Recent scholarship has emphasised
factors such as family connections religious and philanthropic outlooks and ideas about
class relations in reconstructing entrepreneurship during that period This follows a wider
trend among business historians Pamela Walker Laird in a special issue of this journal in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1341
2008 suggested that looking at lsquosocial capitalrsquo or the lsquoassets based on personal
connections and connectabilityrsquo can provide new insights into entrepreneurial behaviour
and success Although social capital like its more traditional counterpart does not
guarantee success or failure by its mere presence historians need to recognise those social
and cultural connections when tracing economic activity especially during times when
lsquofew other assurances of predictability reliability authority and reciprocity existrsquo This is
an especially potent point in a society just beginning to undergo industrial development
In antebellum New England for example bankers might use personal or family
connections to facilitate loans of capital to industrial endeavours and notions of
paternalistic obligations shaped factories as much as market conditions Recognising the
constant interplay of economic and social forces with this idea of social capital then has
infused the study of entrepreneurship during this period of American history when so
much about the economy was in flux with a new energy4
As scholars of the American South struggle to understand the regionrsquos distinct history
of industrial growth different variables such as soil quality climate and of course the
wider political and cultural impact of slavery all factor into the context in which southern
entrepreneurship developed Recent work from Jonathan Wells Frank Byrne and Bruce
Eelman on the development of the antebellum Southrsquos commercial class suggests that
even as they lagged behind the North in many quantitative measures of economic growth
southern merchants were very much a part of the emergent capitalist economy of the
antebellum United States The history of manufacturing in areas like the South Carolina
upcountry or northern Georgia according to recent work by Thomas Downey and Michael
Gagnon offers an example of a thriving if more modest industrial sector at work
Although this literature on the Southrsquos antebellum industrial economy has gone a long way
to discredit the notion that the region was lsquobackwardsrsquo or lsquopre-modernrsquo entrepreneurs still
struggled to facilitate industrial growth in the South So even as they might share the
reserves of social capital through personal and family connections wealth and vision of
their northern counterparts individuals like John Spotswood Wellford had to negotiate a
different and in many ways more difficult context for industrial development5
Wellfordrsquos career offers a fruitful direction to study southern entrepreneurship because
his story blends elements of both the agrarian and the industrial South ndash he enjoyed large
amounts of social capital in both worlds The son of Dr Robert Wellford a prominent
physician in Fredericksburg John Spotswood Wellford took up a career as a dry goods
merchant with contacts across the nation This work offered him many opportunities to
cultivate business contacts in the North and he travelled far and wide in the pursuit of
them In 1819 his father noted that John returned to Fredericksburg safe lsquofrom the
prevalent disease of Northern Cities ndash and the dangers of the boisterous winds when
traveling broad watersrsquo After he became prosperous John settled into the traditional
southern investments in land and slaves In addition to his well-appointed house in
Fredericksburg Wellford owned 1357 acres in Spotsylvania County valued at $4507873
on which he would build a country residence and farm His land as he soon discovered
contained rich deposits of iron ore Spotswood also owned at least 24 slaves five of whom
resided in the Fredericksburg house and 19 in his Spotsylvania estate As a member of the
Fredericksburg Agricultural Society John Wellford served on a committee to promote
innovations in planting and animal husbandry through exhibitions and fairs He also
participated in Fredericksburgrsquos Agricultural Society Show and Fair where he sat on
several prize committees His own agricultural pursuits won him honours for the lsquoBest
Fatted Work Oxenrsquo and lsquoBest Grass-Fed Beefrsquo in 1835 and five years later took home the
award for the best turnips in the region6
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1342 SP Adams
Although he was a wealthy farmer slaveholder and a leading member of
Fredericksburg society John Spotswood Wellford developed political contacts that
aligned him with the Whig Party He first tested the political waters as a founding member
of Fredericksburgrsquos Anti-Jackson Committee in 1827 When Henry Clay visited
Fredericksburg a year later he received well-wishers and political aspirants at Wellfordrsquos
house Wellford followed Clay into the Whig Party where he served as a prominent figure
in Spotsylvania Countyrsquos local party apparatus In 1834 he participated prominently in a
convention that denounced President Jacksonrsquos removal of federal deposits from the Bank
of the United States chaired several Spotsylvania County Whig Party meetings and
headlined a formal request that Henry Clay come to Fredericksburg to do a lsquopublic
entertainmentrsquo in 1840 He joined the Fredericksburg Auxiliary to the American
Colonization Society in 1826 and served as a manager for several years Despite his
affiliation with the ACSrsquos mild form of anti-slavery John owned slaves throughout his
life In 1835 he was named to a committee to explore lsquomeasures necessary to be adopted
in regard to the movements making in the Northern States with respect to the Abolition of
Slaveryrsquo Apparently mild anti-slavery initiatives sat well with John Spotswood Wellford
but any immediate threats to the lsquopeculiar institutionrsquo provoked an urgent response
His brother and close business associate Beverly soon thereafter joined the
Fredericksburg Anti-Abolition Committee7
Wellford needed help from outside Virginia in order to develop his landrsquos industrial
potential He found investment capital difficult to come by in Fredericksburg even though
he served on the Bank of Virginiarsquos board for many years John Majewski has
demonstrated that elsewhere in Virginia a similar dearth of investment capital for canal
and railroad development forced the state to subsidise ndash often poorly ndash the growth of the
Old Dominionrsquos transportation infrastructure Instead of state subsidies Wellford tried to
use his social capital here in the form of some northern contacts to develop the industrial
resources of his landholdings He wrote to the Philadelphia merchant and ironmaster
Samuel G Wright in 1823 touting the richness of Spotsylvania Countyrsquos ore deposits
After sending Wright a sample he wrote that lsquoI am informed the land abounds with it it is
to be found in great quantities of the same quality sent you and that near the surfacersquo
Wellford reported that the tract for sale was lsquoabout ten miles on a turnpike road from this
place to the land I understand the tract is a large one and for sale the land is generally very
poor and consequently may be purchased cheaprsquo and offered to lsquosend you a few Tons of
the ore where you could better judge of the propriety of working the purchasersquo Nearly four
years later Wellford still offered hopes that Wright would invest in ore mining Even
though he inadvertently revealed the lack of indigenous investment in Spotsylvania ore
fields by claiming lsquothere is no fear of competition so you will lose nothing by a little
delayrsquo Wellford hoped to secure Wrightrsquos partnership Neither overture resulted in a land
purchase and the quest for northern investment in Spotsylvania County failed8
Internal improvements in the region formed as one of John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos true
passions as he was involved personally in a number of projects over a number of years
Yet like his quest for northern investment in ore land Wellfordrsquos dreams of integrating
Fredericksburg within the nationrsquos growing transportation network never really came to
pass Plans for improving the Rappahannock River in order to link Fredericksburgrsquos
tidewater port to upriver markets date back to the late eighteenth century and by 1811 the
Virginia Legislature commissioned the Rappahannock Company to oversee the lsquoopening
clearing and extending the inland navigationrsquo of the river In 1816 state officials
commissioned an official survey of the route but these ambitious plans stalled Wellford
was a director of a later version of this firm called the RappahannockNavigation Company
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1343
which received corporate charters from the state in 1826 and 1828 Johnrsquos warehouse held
the lumber ready for the construction of locks he advertised for lsquo10 or fifteen able bodied
negro menrsquo to work on the project and at a groundbreaking ceremony offered a toast in
praise of the Virginia Board of Public Works lsquoThe fund of Internal Improvement ndash the
State helps those who help themselvesrsquo These ambitious plans again ran into trouble as
company officials deemed the Rappahannock navigation inadequate by 18369 In 1831
Wellford was unanimously elected secretary and treasurer of the Fredericksburg and
Potomac Company a firm that sought to build a turnpike then railroad linking the city to a
steamboat landing on Potomac Creek Although the founders predicted their system could
carry merchandise from Fredericksburg to Baltimore in 10 hours or less this plan also
failed to materialise A year later he helped secure a charter for the Fredericksburg and
Potomac Creek Railroad Company which apparently failed to attract enough stock
subscriptions Finally in 1835 John agreed to serve as a manager of the Rappahannock and
Blue Ridge Railroad yet another plan that failed to come to fruition10
All of these unfinished projects must have been frustrating for John Spotswood
Wellford Although he remained a prominent public figure in Fredericksburg an
upstanding member of the Presbyterian Church the anchor of a well-respected and
influential family and a successful banker and merchant his attempts to bring industrial
prosperity to his home town seemed mired in mediocrity So while he maintained a web of
contacts in these social economic and political circles this social capital was somewhat
limited in its efficacy In many ways he developed lsquopersonalrsquo rather than lsquosocialrsquo capital
as his various connections with fellow landholders Whigs and internal improvement
boosters did not translate into real change in the region even as they marked him
individually as one of the leading advocates of industrial development in the
Fredericksburg area This was reflected by Wellfordrsquos rather unconventional role as the
scion of a wealthy Virginia family he owned land but seemed more interested in
cultivating its iron ore than coaxing tobacco or wheat out of the ground Wellford owned
slaves but also belonged to an anti-slavery society He came from a well-connected and
affluent Fredericksburg family but sought to make connections with northern investors
and merchants throughout his career Like many entrepreneurs across history John
Spotswood Wellford demonstrated a willingness to break from the expected trajectory of
his life ndash he wanted to use his personal capital for material gain In 1836 he would get that
chance during the short-lived boom in the Virginia charcoal iron trade
The birth of Catharine Furnace
lsquoThe construction of the hearth is a business in which the founder takes an active partrsquo
Frederick Overman wrote in the 1854 version of his extensive guidebook The Manufacture
of Iron in All its Various Branches As the furnace superintendent drawing an annual salary
of $1000 John Spotswood Wellford undoubtedly involved himself in the early
construction and operation of the furnace First and foremost he gave the furnace its
distinctive name lsquoCatharinersquo after his mother Catharine Yates Wellford But perhaps
more importantly Wellford kept a careful account of the cost of labour and materials that
went into the making of Catharine Furnace This account book provides an invaluable
insight into the furnace operation Wellfordrsquos entries shown in Figure 1 were terse in the
fashion of most nineteenth-century business account books Nonetheless these entries
provide a narrative history of both the day-to-day and long-term goals of the enterprise
Even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company was a corporate
endeavour John Spotswood Wellford ran the business much like a proprietary owner
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1344 SP Adams
Figure 1 Typical page of John Wellfordrsquos Catharine Furnace Account Book Source Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC)
By the end of 1837 the construction tab had run to a little more than $7000 When coupled
with the cost of acquiring land for charcoaling and mining ore this put Catharine Furnace
well within the cost range of the average Virginia charcoal furnace but much beyond the
range of most individual proprietors11
Iron furnaces were usually lsquoblown inrsquo in the early spring so it was important that
Catharine Furnace be completed in the winter of 1837ndash38 By early January a set of hearth
stones had been delivered to the site for inside lining of the furnace the final brickwork on
the furnace was being completed and the furnacersquos lsquosuction enginersquo (most likely a steam
engine for operating the furnace bellows) had been repaired and was ready for use
A sizeable work force of at least 86 slaves was in place with 19 slaves allocated to work in
various ore mines in the area Although no official production figures are extant Wellfordrsquos
account book notes that by May of 1838 the first shipment of iron was hauled away from
the area The shipment of new hearth stones in late September signalled a successful first
blast as furnace linings often wore away as workers continually fed the blast12
Making the iron was only one facet of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Companyrsquos business how they could transport their goods to market was an entirely
different struggle Overland travel was the simplest and most common option but also the
most expensive Virginiarsquos charcoal iron operations needed to be located near ample
supplies of ore and timber which usually meant they were in sparsely populated areas
When Rockbridge Countyrsquos William Weaver sought to expand his iron manufacturing
business in 1826 he purposely located his new forge close to his blast furnace so as to
minimise the distance that the heavy iron pigs would travel in wagons or carts The Union
Forge in Patrick County paid $8 per ton to ship its iron only a short distance to market
In this regard Catharine Furnacersquos close proximity to Fredericksburg and its flat terrain
gave it an advantage over other Virginia charcoal iron furnaces the majority of which were
located in the mountainous counties in theValley ofVirginia The Swift RunGap Turnpike
commonly known as the Orange Turnpike served as Spotsylvania Countyrsquos major road
project The arearsquos distinctive red clay in the words of one historian was lsquosticky as fish glue
when wetrsquo and caked aroundwagon wheels Conditions on this road were so bad moreover
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1345
that in 1823 a lawsuit found the company negligent of regular repair and maintenance
Hauling iron in these conditions could be done over short distances only which ruled out
most overland routes for shipping iron from Spotsylvania County13
Whenever possible Virginia ironmakers shipped their products to market via natural
or improved waterways William Weaverrsquos placement of his new forge in 1826 sought to
reduce overland shipping costs but also put manufacturing iron within easy distance of the
North River where flat-bottomed boats could ship directly to major market centres When
the James River and Kanawha Canal reached the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains at
Lynchburg in 1840 the ironmakers of the Valley saw a dramatic reduction in
transportation costs to Richmond Even though John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos dream of easy
water navigation on the upper Rappahannock failed to materialise Fredericksburg still
served as an important link to the eastern seaboard via its tidewater port An 1835 guide to
Virginia referred to Fredericksburg as a lsquoprosperous portrsquo and noted that its wharves could
handle vessels up to 140 tons Local officials felt that they could have more support in
developing seaborne traffic from their state and federal governments In 1836 citizens
petitioned Congress to make Fredericksburg an official port of entry ndash ships had to pay
collection duties at Tappahannock 60 miles lower on the Rappahannock River ndash arguing
that this has caused lsquogreat trouble expense and inconveniencersquo to their merchants
Nonetheless iron could be shipped by water out of Fredericksburg at a fraction of the cost
of land transport and this would remain the major outlet for Wellfordrsquos iron business
throughout the antebellum period14
Fredericksburgrsquos connection to Virginiarsquos railway network was provided by the
Richmond Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad Company Chartered in 1834 this
railroad at first contained a rare and controversial clause that gave it the exclusive rights to
build a rail line between Richmond and Washington DC The Supreme Court struck down
this clause but the RFampP nonetheless served as the major north ndash south artery for eastern
Virginia by linking Fredericksburg to Richmond in 1837 The RFampP later built a branch to
Aquia Creek in 1842 which connected Fredericksburg to Washington DC via steamboat
Unfortunately many of these transportation projects were limited at the time Wellford
turned to iron manufacturing as the many failures in the regionrsquos internal improvements
kept Fredericksburg on the margins of Virginiarsquos budding industrial economy
One geographer notes that as Alexandria expanded from the north and Richmond
extended from the south by 1835 Fredericksburg lsquodid not reflect a tightly integrated
settlement system and this pervasive weakness highlighted the fragile underpinnings of the
local economyrsquo15
Despite the unsteady connections to market John Spotswood Wellford successfully
brought Catharine Furnace into producing iron in short order Unfortunately the price of
iron plunged right at the time that the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Company started selling it The economic downturn on the heels of the Panic of 1837
pushed iron prices to about half ndash $25 to $22 a ton ndash the level that they had been in the
previous year Luckily the company had a number of close ties with potential customers
$140080 worth of Catharine Furnace pig iron went to the Fredericksburg Union
Manufacturing Company in 1838 and another $111800 in the following year Undoubtedly
the presence of two Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company stockholders
William Crump and Edward Carmichael on the board of this local firm helped close that
sale Wellfordrsquos account book suggests that most of Catharine Furnacersquos initial production
made its way to the Tredegar Iron Company in Richmond where it would have most likely
been made into bar rails in Tredegarrsquos new rolling mill As Francis Deane served as both a
major stockholder in the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1346 SP Adams
the President of the Tredegar Iron Company the purchase of $2500 ndash or 55 of Catharine
Furnacersquos sales in 1838 ndash worth of pig iron benefited both firms16
John hoped to reach markets outside the Old Dominion in Catharine Furnacersquos initial
years of iron production His years spent working the dry goods trade in the North offered
some contacts his extensive family connections offered other potential forms of social
capital While his younger brother Charles Carter Wellford was in New York City on
business in 1838 John shipped a sample of Catharine Furnace iron for testing in that
market The iron must have answered relatively well as Wood Johnston amp Burritt a dry
goods firm in New York City with ties to Richmond Virginia purchased $22818 worth of
iron from Wellford that same year Three years later Wood Johnston and Burritt sold
another $116729 worth of Catharine Furnace iron shipped to them via the schooner
Andrew Browne The only other out-of-state customer in 1838 was CG Morris of
Charleston South Carolina who purchased $22818 worth of pig iron and sash weights
from Wellford17
The quest for new markets continued over the next few years with varying levels of
success In February of 1839 Wellford sold two tons of iron to a customer in the District of
Columbia No additional entries appear for this particular buyer so it seems that Catharine
Furnace iron did not take off in the Washington area That same year Wellford shipped six
tons of pig iron to Boston at $2751 per ton The New England market seemed a bit more
promising as Wellford received $291568 in sales from Charles Dyer of Providence
This was most likely pig iron for use by the Phoenix Iron Foundry Company a Providence
firm that manufactured various finished iron products such as gear wheels and specialised
machine tools In 1841 Wellford noted in his account book that lsquoiron was taken to
Portland to try the marketrsquo by Captain Freeman Smith and that Smith sold at least three
tons at $2632 per ton in Maine18
In its early years the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company exploited
Francis Deanersquos high position in Tredegar Iron Company thus making personal
connections between the incorporators essential to the firmrsquos early survival Deane had
been present in the creation of many Virginia ironworks and his personal connections in the
state trade were unparalleled In 1839 alone Tredegar purchased $16500 ndash probably over
500 tons worth ndash of iron from Catharine Furnace As an incorporator of the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company Deane had the opportunity to enrich both his
primary employer as well as his Fredericksburg investment by purchasing pig iron from
Catharine Furnace The following year however sales to Tredegar slowed to $3500 and no
more major transactions between the two companies occurred after 1840 This was in part
due to the financial problems suffered by the TredegarWorks and in particular the result of
Deanersquos inability to sell the firmrsquos products By 1841 the fortunes of the Tredegar Works
were in the words of Kathleen Bruce at a very lsquolow ebbrsquo and Deane was on his way out as
the companyrsquos chief executive the following year Tredegarrsquos ties with Fredericksburg
continued after Deanersquos departure Joseph Reid Anderson contacted John Spotswood
Wellford in the summer of 1841 to inquire about introducing Tredegar iron in
Fredericksburg Apparently the two had discussed the project in Washington DC and
Anderson offered Wellford work as an agent of the Tredegar Iron Works lsquoFrom the prices
paid as I understand and quantity of country iron shipped there from [Richmond]rsquo
Andersonwrote lsquoas well as the high character of the Tred Iron at present I am led to believe
that advantage to all concerned may accrue from its introduction into that marketrsquo Some
Catharine Furnace iron was sold out of Tredegarrsquos yard in Richmond as David J Burr amp
Co purchased seventeen tons in 1841 found that load wanting in quality and so asked
Wellford to replace the iron In the summer of 1845 a manager at Tredegar offered to
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1347
purchase 60 or 70 tons of lsquohigh and mottled Pig Ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace at the
relatively high rate of $28 per ton19
Making shot and shell for Washington
Following Deanersquos departure from Richmond the future of Catharine Furnace was even
more in the hands of John Spotswood Wellford In a sense he used this turn of events to
turn his individual connections ndash in this case much more lsquopersonalrsquo than lsquosocialrsquo capital ndash
to the benefit of his ironmaking business In 1841 Wellford increased his individual
ownership in the company to a little over 40 through the purchase of a controlling
amount of capital stock from one of the original incorporators His son William Wellford
also held Edward Carmichaelrsquos share in trust thus giving the Wellford family functional
command over the firm as they controlled 60 of the corporation The first three full years
of operation at Catharine Furnace had seen sales totals of $450191 in 1838 $18376 in
1839 and $677568 in 1840 ndash a total combined revenue of $2965359 Revenues thus
lagged well behind the accumulated operating costs of the furnace that had run to
$6874891 by 1840 Figure 2 shows this trend Clearly a new business strategy was
needed in order to make this endeavour work as Catharine Furnace had difficulties
breaking into various private markets In the summer of 1841 John Spotswood Wellford
Francis Deane and Edward Carmichael all travelled to Washington DC to seek ordnance
contracts from the United States War Department Like its earlier connections with
Tredegar the firmrsquos directors sought to turn their social capital into financial success 20
As it turns out contracting with the federal government suited Catharine Furnace quite
well so long as John Spotswood Wellford was in charge Ordnance contracts were
arranged between the War or Navy departments and individuals so the status and
reputation of an individual contractor weighed heavy on the process On 11 September
1841 Wellford signed a contract with the Navy to deliver 70000 rounds of 32 lb solid
shot at three cents a pound to Gosport Naval Yard in Norfolk Virginia The contract came
Figure 2 Estimates of operating costs and sales at Catharine Furnace 1837 ndash 46 Source Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1348 SP Adams
into force on 2 February 1842 with the final delivery of shot taking place by 31 January
1844 Pending inspection and satisfaction by the Navy Wellford would receive $67200
from the federal government In the spring of 1842 Catharine Furnace obtained shot
patterns from James Walker That summer at least five moulders William H Ferguson
William Pulham R Parker Nicholas Wharton and A Sutherland were hard at work
making 32 lb solid shot from Catharine Furnace iron and in June of 1842 Wellford sent
his first shipment of 5230 shot to Norfolk Naval records indicate that the ordnance officers
at Gosport received over 24000 shot by the end of 1842 Shipments tended to occur fairly
regularly and Catharine Furnace produced an impressive amount of ordnance in a
relatively short period of time as illustrated in Table 1 Assuming that each piece of 32 lb
solid shot actually weighed 32 pounds ndash an assumption that did not always hold true for
nineteenth-century naval ordnance ndash then the estimated value of Wellfordrsquos contract in
1842 alone was roughly $232089621
On the surface Catharine Furnacersquos success with military contracting put the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company on a strong trajectory With the
federal government providing a strong income stream Wellford might have parlayed his
success in ordnance into wider markets for his iron Historians of technology have
provided many examples in which antebellum military enterprise helped reorganise and
refine production techniques in northern government installations like the armouries at
Springfield Massachusetts and Philadelphia as well as with private contractors like
Connecticutrsquos Samuel Colt Virginiarsquos Harpers Ferry Armory exhibited a less than
exemplary record with regard to streamlining the production of muskets and small arms
But in the end even isolated Harpers Ferry entered the modern industrial age So at least
among northern industries military enterprise was in the words of Merritt Roe Smith a
lsquokey ingredient in the evolution of complex technological systemsrsquo and served as a critical
factor in that regionrsquos antebellum industrialisation22
Rather than diversify its production line or markets Catharine Furnacersquos manager
expanded further into the highly volatile ordnance trade Using his personal connections
with the Navy Wellford secured yet another contract for 70000 32 lb solid shot in
February of 1843 The terms of the contract were the same as the 1841 deal although this
time Wellford had less than a year to complete it Since he shipped only about a third of
this amount from Catharine Furnace in 1842 it is questionable whether or not Wellford
expected to produce all of the contracted shot at his own works It was not uncommon for
contractors even if they owned or operated an iron furnace themselves to sub-contract
Table 1 32 lb solid shot shipped to Gosport naval yard from Catharine Furnace 1842
Amount Received Estimated Value ($)
22 June 1842 5250 504000 22 June 1842 2623 251808 18 July 1842 3507 336672 4 August 1842 1692 162432 20 August 1842 2227 213792 8 September 1842 2102 201792 22 September 1842 1401 134496 3 October 1842 1874 179904 3 November 1842 3500 336000 Total 24176 2320896
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1349
production out to other firms at times In fact Wellford notes in his account book that 118
tons of pig iron shipped from the Fredericksburg wharf to Catharine Furnace in 1842 to be
melted into ball in his cupola furnaces Whether or not he had purchased this iron from
other furnaces or recalled it from pig iron meant for sale elsewhere is unclear But a year
later Wellford paid for 55 cartloads or 275 tons of pig iron from the Fredericksburg
wharf back to Catharine Furnace noting that this iron had been sent back from Boston
unsold lsquoon acct of its being so whitersquo and lsquowas therefore worked into ballrsquo23
Producing shot for the Navy secured a solid stream of income for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as a steady demand for iron for the
workers at Catharine Furnace These ordnance contracts required constant vigilance
however as Wellford visited Washington DC on numerous occasions to maintain his
personal connections with the War Department He also paid William Ridgely $8500 lsquofor
arranging accts and settling with [the] Naval Boardrsquo in 1842 Ridgely was a long-time
employee of the Navy who had been the Chief Clerk of the Naval Commissioners until
September of 1842 when he took a new position as Chief Clerk to the Bureau of Navy
Yards and Docks Sporadic payments to Ridgely ranging from $2000 to $10000
continued over the next few years but Wellfordrsquos entries do not give a full account of the
services rendered to him It is likely that Wellfordrsquos various contacts in Washington
provided him with valuable information When he learned that a Baltimore firm had failed
to supply 5000 cannon shot and that inspection officials had rejected 5000 additional units
Wellford wrote to Commodore WM Crane to see if he could provide any information
about securing a contract for himself to make up the 10000 in lost shot to the Navy24
Wellford also tried to squeeze larger profit margins out of the contract by rearranging
one of Catharine Furnacersquos great economic disadvantages ndash its high cost of transportation
The 1843 contract for example had an allowance of $2 per ton from Catharine Furnace to
Fredericksburg and another $1 per ton from Fredericksburg to Gosport In March of 1843
a naval official informed Wellford that lsquoafter reciting the price to be given for the shot
transportation to Fredericksburg and freight that no other allowance is to be madersquo for
shipping shot to Norfolk Whether or not the inspection of the ordnance occurred at
the furnace or at the naval yard was another factor in making contracts profitable Shot
and shell that was rejected at Catharine Furnace could be recast cheaply on the spot
rejected ordnance at Gosport needed to be shipped back to the furnace at the companyrsquos
expense Shipments to Gosport in the summer of 1843 were delayed by late arrival of an
inspection officer to Fredericksburg Some years later Wellford complained to the Navy
that their insistence upon inspections at the yard increased his already prohibitive
transportation costs25
Needless to say Wellford found ordnance a lucrative business for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company By 1843 Wellfordrsquos contracts with the War
Department were providing nearly all of Catharine Furnacersquos income This strategy
carried some risk as Wellford lost out on a contract to provide shot and shell for the Navy
in 1844 This contract went to the Tredegar Company now under the leadership of Joseph
Reid Anderson and making not only basic ordnance like shot and shell but also casting
cannon for the Federal government Like Catharine Furnace Tredegar drew upon strong
personal connections to Washington officials to secure these contracts Eastern Virginiarsquos
iron trade therefore relied almost completely on the federal statersquos demand for ordnance
This dependence proved tenuous when Wellfordrsquos relationship with the Navy soured in
1845 to the point that he was ordered to send back the governmentrsquos shot gauge gauge
plate and cylinders as well as any other instruments for shot inspection26
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1350 SP Adams
Wellford found making shot for the Navy to be a financially rewarding endeavour
even as it carried risks In a memorandum written into his account book he justified a
$344450 commission or 5 on his Navy contract in 1843 for lsquofurnishing the required
security and taking the contract in my name for better or for worsersquo lsquoThis contract I gave
the furnace of the advantage ofrsquo he continued lsquoand I do not hesitate to say that I could
have sold it for a profit of 10 per cent [] I would give that to day for a similar onersquo
Completing the Navyrsquos contract on 32 lb shot he argued in late 1844 kept him lsquo5 days in
the week absent from his familyrsquo and so he considered his personal charge of $122191 on
the yearrsquos receipts to be perfectly reasonable Wellford had reason to value his experience
with the Navy as he received $3226320 worth of contracts in the 1844 ndash45 fiscal year to
provide shot and shell for the Navyrsquos land-based fortifications These contracts accounted
for 272 of the Navyrsquos expenditure for this purpose and it made Wellford the single
largest naval ordnance contractor in the nation Losing this lucrative stream of income hurt
the future financial prospects of Catharine Furnace27
Rather than dwell on the failures with the Navy Wellford jumped into the manufacture
of 8 and 10 inch artillery shells and 12 and 24 lb solid shot for the US Army by signing a
$2442827 contract in 1844 He also upped his own commission to 10 arguing again
that he was remaining personally responsible for the contract lsquoThis contract I gave the
Furnace the advantage ofrsquo he argued in defence of his $241697 from the companyrsquos
account Rather than sub-contract out the work to other ironworks Wellford reminded his
partners that he planned to keep all of the Army business at Catharine Furnace He did not
lsquohesitate to say I could have sold it for a much larger advancersquo for his own personal profit
In the summer of 1844 Wellford rushed shell patterns from an armoury in Washington
and after receiving guidance from ordnance officer Colonel George Talcott was shipping
shot and shells to Fort Monroe For this job Wellford secured a favourable rate of 4 cents
for 10 inch shells 5 cents for 8 inch shells and 314 cents for 12 and 24 lb solid shot
Although the initial contract was for a little under $25000 Wellford continued to make
shot and shell for the Army well into 1846 by signing several small contracts in 1845 and a
large $1244469 order in 1846 Since Wellford upped his commission to 15 for that later
work he clearly felt that his personal stake in the army contracts merited a larger share of
the companyrsquos profits28
John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal fortunes with Catharine Furnace had finally
seemed to turn the corner By 1846 he had acquired a controlling interest in the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company by purchasing more shares in the
corporation bringing ownership stake to three-fifths Charles Dyer of Providence
moreover had recently concluded that lsquothis is as good if not the best market in the country
to dispose of all he has or may in future makersquo for Catharine Furnace pig iron Wellford
had 150 to 200 tons of pig iron on hand at the Fredericksburg wharf ready to ship out to the
Northeast Although the prospects of many Virginia charcoal iron furnaces seemed to be
on the decline in the face of Pennsylvaniarsquos anthracite ironmakers Wellfordrsquos connections
with the War Department and the suggestion of a niche market for Catharine Furnacersquos
lsquogray ironrsquo in Providence offered a glimpse of hope in late 184629
Following the outbreak of the War with Mexico Navy officials approached Wellford
about a new contract for shot and shell On 3 September 1846 the head of the Navyrsquos
Bureau of Ordnance Commodore Louis Warrington praised Wellfordrsquos past service and
in light of a shortage of shot and shell offered Wellford the opportunity to provide 10000
units of solid 32 lb shot and 7000 shells for 32 lb cannons for the Navy Wellford
responded in the positive as Commodore Warrington sent out a contract in October or
November of 1846 for his signature However Wellford never signed the contract and in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1351
late December of 1846 the residents of Fredericksburg were startled to discover that John
Spotswood Wellford the driving force behind so many social economic and political
movements in Spotsylvania County had died at the moment when Catharine Furnace
seemed on the brink of big success30
In the wake of Johnrsquos death the future direction of Catharine Furnace was in doubt
Edward Carmichael now living in Richmond attempted to assume control over Wellfordrsquos
Navy contract for 10000 32 lb shot and 7000 shells in early January 1847 As William
Wellford stalled in settling his fatherrsquos estate Carmichael argued that the Navy should
transfer the Catharine Furnace work to his authority Carmichael also undertook some
contracts to supply Army ordnance that he expected to be filled with Catharine Furnace
iron He immediately wrote to Fredericksburg asking for two or three pigs of lsquothe very best
Gray ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace to be sent to Richmond immediately so that he could
complete this contract at local forges In early February a lsquofearfulrsquo Carmichael advised
William to ship any remaining shot and shell on the Catharine Furnace grounds to Norfolk
by mid-March so as to fulfil any obligations he had to the Navy By late February William
had taken inventory of the remaining ordnance stock at Catharine Furnace and agreed to
ship the shot and shell on hand for the Army and to lsquomould the 24 lb Solid Shot and the 32
lb Sold Shot for the Navy with one workman on eachrsquo through mid-March The completion
of this final contract would be the last bit of ordnance manufacture done at Catharine
Furnace during the 1840s as William Wellford made clear in his correspondence that he
had no interest in pursuing the business further31
With John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos death then Catharine Furnacersquos future was in doubt
William Wellford Johnrsquos son became the de facto manager at the furnace although he
seemed to be a reluctant heir to this position William wrote to Edward Carmichael in early
1847 that lsquoI can by no means accept the execution of the Navy contractrsquo and that it
lsquoappears to be equally illegal for you and Mr C acting as surviving partners to undertake
itrsquo Because the Army and Navy contracted with individuals and not corporations John
Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal estate ndash not the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company ndash were the only ones authorised to complete any remaining
work Indeed the firmrsquos attorney had recently advised that William was only authorised to
continue Catharine Furnacersquos operations lsquofor the purpose of completing the execution of
any contracts which may have been entered into but not fully executed by his testator at
the time of his deathrsquo and that lsquoAt the death of Mr Wellford the partnership which existed
between himself amp others in the iron works ceased except for the purpose of completing
existing engagements and winding up the businessrsquo Only a few weeks later the trustee of
Francis Deanersquos share in the firm Richard H Cunningham announced that after several
meetings with William Wellford it was clear that he lsquohad no desire or intention of
purchasing the propertyrsquo and that the best course of action would be to liquidate the
physical assets of the corporation and ask $40000 for the lsquoEstate Fixtures and Mules (not
including any Pig Iron)rsquo By early April Fredericksburgrsquos Democratic Recorder
advertised the a June sale at auction of lsquoThe Catharine Furnace with Dwelling 4648 acres
of land containing iron ore well wooded fixtures patterns stock steam engine house
cupolas blacksmithrsquos tools ampc ampc with everything requisite for a complete iron
manufacturing establishmentrsquo32
Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
Was Catharine Furnace successful This is a difficult question to address without
understanding the early context in which the firm operated as well as its utter dependence
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1352 SP Adams
upon the personal capital of John Spotswood Wellford The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company struggled to find a reliable outlet for the products of Catharine
Furnace during its early history Local state and national trends created an unfavourable
atmosphere for starting an iron smelting operation during the late 1830s and early 1840s
John Wellford would have been well aware of his disadvantages in this regard As a longshy
time Fredericksburg resident with first-hand familiarity of the grandiose visions false
starts and frustrating stalls of local projects such as the Rappahannock Navigation
Company or the Fredericksburg and Potomac Creek Railroad Company Wellford
followed his entrepreneurial instincts into less traditional markets for ironmakers Rather
than wait for Fredericksburgrsquos prospects to magically reverse or dump his own financial
resources into a new improvement or manufacturing investment Wellford used his long
history of political and economic contacts to his firmrsquos advantage Military contracts
shifted the responsibility of success or failure into an entirely new area of risk ndash
Wellfordrsquos ability to maintain his contacts in the Navy and War departments and to spin
them into lucrative contracts for the production of shot and shell In the short term the
firmrsquos reliance upon government contracts saved Catharine Furnace and made the
operation profitable
In the long run though the dependency on John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal capital
bound the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company to its
owner and manager This was not the sort of social capital that could transfer easily to either
Johnrsquos family or his fellow incorporators In the end it was not Wellfordrsquos lack of
entrepreneurial talent that limited Catharine Furnacersquos long-term prospects but perhaps his
creative way of overcoming the various obstacles to profitable ironmaking that existed in
antebellum Virginia But just as traditional forms of financial capital need a strong
institutional environment to be effective so does social or personal capital need a
favourable context The Old Dominion for various reasons did not provide that favourable
context Wellfordrsquos case then offers an example of how his particular entrepreneurial
strategy offers up a short-term success story while at the same time exposing the difficult
context that industrial endeavours faced in the antebellum South
Local factors endemic to Fredericksburg for example played a large role in
amplifying the long-term weakness of relying upon personal rather than physical capital
for Catharine Furnace The most promising regional market Richmond essentially closed
up to Catharine Furnace pig iron by the early 1840s Once Francis Deane left the employ of
the Tredegar Company that firm failed to make massive purchases of Catharine Furnace
iron As the James River and Kanawha Canal linked the ironmakers of the Valley of
Virginia to Richmond moreover Catharine Furnace was further left out of the mix
Without the strong connections to market Wellfordrsquos successors most likely would have
continued to struggle to compete with other more integrated ironmakers In a larger sense
Fredericksburgrsquos entire manufacturing economy was being squeezed out of the picture
during the antebellum period as local boosters failed to make the necessary investments in
the regionrsquos physical infrastructure Geographer Keith Littlefield estimates that the city
lost control over 76 of the trade in its rural hinterland by 1860 as Richmond and
Alexandria expanded their commercial reach at Fredericksburgrsquos expense John
Wellfordrsquos own experience with failed turnpikes river improvements and railroads
during his pre-ironmaking days signalled a failure to secure a variety of market outlets for
Fredericksburgrsquos manufacturers Because Wellfordrsquos furnace produced pig iron ndash a high
bulk and low value commodity ndash shipping costs were a major factor in marketing its
products afar Since the cityrsquos commercial and manufacturing sector served a smaller and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
Business History 1341
2008 suggested that looking at lsquosocial capitalrsquo or the lsquoassets based on personal
connections and connectabilityrsquo can provide new insights into entrepreneurial behaviour
and success Although social capital like its more traditional counterpart does not
guarantee success or failure by its mere presence historians need to recognise those social
and cultural connections when tracing economic activity especially during times when
lsquofew other assurances of predictability reliability authority and reciprocity existrsquo This is
an especially potent point in a society just beginning to undergo industrial development
In antebellum New England for example bankers might use personal or family
connections to facilitate loans of capital to industrial endeavours and notions of
paternalistic obligations shaped factories as much as market conditions Recognising the
constant interplay of economic and social forces with this idea of social capital then has
infused the study of entrepreneurship during this period of American history when so
much about the economy was in flux with a new energy4
As scholars of the American South struggle to understand the regionrsquos distinct history
of industrial growth different variables such as soil quality climate and of course the
wider political and cultural impact of slavery all factor into the context in which southern
entrepreneurship developed Recent work from Jonathan Wells Frank Byrne and Bruce
Eelman on the development of the antebellum Southrsquos commercial class suggests that
even as they lagged behind the North in many quantitative measures of economic growth
southern merchants were very much a part of the emergent capitalist economy of the
antebellum United States The history of manufacturing in areas like the South Carolina
upcountry or northern Georgia according to recent work by Thomas Downey and Michael
Gagnon offers an example of a thriving if more modest industrial sector at work
Although this literature on the Southrsquos antebellum industrial economy has gone a long way
to discredit the notion that the region was lsquobackwardsrsquo or lsquopre-modernrsquo entrepreneurs still
struggled to facilitate industrial growth in the South So even as they might share the
reserves of social capital through personal and family connections wealth and vision of
their northern counterparts individuals like John Spotswood Wellford had to negotiate a
different and in many ways more difficult context for industrial development5
Wellfordrsquos career offers a fruitful direction to study southern entrepreneurship because
his story blends elements of both the agrarian and the industrial South ndash he enjoyed large
amounts of social capital in both worlds The son of Dr Robert Wellford a prominent
physician in Fredericksburg John Spotswood Wellford took up a career as a dry goods
merchant with contacts across the nation This work offered him many opportunities to
cultivate business contacts in the North and he travelled far and wide in the pursuit of
them In 1819 his father noted that John returned to Fredericksburg safe lsquofrom the
prevalent disease of Northern Cities ndash and the dangers of the boisterous winds when
traveling broad watersrsquo After he became prosperous John settled into the traditional
southern investments in land and slaves In addition to his well-appointed house in
Fredericksburg Wellford owned 1357 acres in Spotsylvania County valued at $4507873
on which he would build a country residence and farm His land as he soon discovered
contained rich deposits of iron ore Spotswood also owned at least 24 slaves five of whom
resided in the Fredericksburg house and 19 in his Spotsylvania estate As a member of the
Fredericksburg Agricultural Society John Wellford served on a committee to promote
innovations in planting and animal husbandry through exhibitions and fairs He also
participated in Fredericksburgrsquos Agricultural Society Show and Fair where he sat on
several prize committees His own agricultural pursuits won him honours for the lsquoBest
Fatted Work Oxenrsquo and lsquoBest Grass-Fed Beefrsquo in 1835 and five years later took home the
award for the best turnips in the region6
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1342 SP Adams
Although he was a wealthy farmer slaveholder and a leading member of
Fredericksburg society John Spotswood Wellford developed political contacts that
aligned him with the Whig Party He first tested the political waters as a founding member
of Fredericksburgrsquos Anti-Jackson Committee in 1827 When Henry Clay visited
Fredericksburg a year later he received well-wishers and political aspirants at Wellfordrsquos
house Wellford followed Clay into the Whig Party where he served as a prominent figure
in Spotsylvania Countyrsquos local party apparatus In 1834 he participated prominently in a
convention that denounced President Jacksonrsquos removal of federal deposits from the Bank
of the United States chaired several Spotsylvania County Whig Party meetings and
headlined a formal request that Henry Clay come to Fredericksburg to do a lsquopublic
entertainmentrsquo in 1840 He joined the Fredericksburg Auxiliary to the American
Colonization Society in 1826 and served as a manager for several years Despite his
affiliation with the ACSrsquos mild form of anti-slavery John owned slaves throughout his
life In 1835 he was named to a committee to explore lsquomeasures necessary to be adopted
in regard to the movements making in the Northern States with respect to the Abolition of
Slaveryrsquo Apparently mild anti-slavery initiatives sat well with John Spotswood Wellford
but any immediate threats to the lsquopeculiar institutionrsquo provoked an urgent response
His brother and close business associate Beverly soon thereafter joined the
Fredericksburg Anti-Abolition Committee7
Wellford needed help from outside Virginia in order to develop his landrsquos industrial
potential He found investment capital difficult to come by in Fredericksburg even though
he served on the Bank of Virginiarsquos board for many years John Majewski has
demonstrated that elsewhere in Virginia a similar dearth of investment capital for canal
and railroad development forced the state to subsidise ndash often poorly ndash the growth of the
Old Dominionrsquos transportation infrastructure Instead of state subsidies Wellford tried to
use his social capital here in the form of some northern contacts to develop the industrial
resources of his landholdings He wrote to the Philadelphia merchant and ironmaster
Samuel G Wright in 1823 touting the richness of Spotsylvania Countyrsquos ore deposits
After sending Wright a sample he wrote that lsquoI am informed the land abounds with it it is
to be found in great quantities of the same quality sent you and that near the surfacersquo
Wellford reported that the tract for sale was lsquoabout ten miles on a turnpike road from this
place to the land I understand the tract is a large one and for sale the land is generally very
poor and consequently may be purchased cheaprsquo and offered to lsquosend you a few Tons of
the ore where you could better judge of the propriety of working the purchasersquo Nearly four
years later Wellford still offered hopes that Wright would invest in ore mining Even
though he inadvertently revealed the lack of indigenous investment in Spotsylvania ore
fields by claiming lsquothere is no fear of competition so you will lose nothing by a little
delayrsquo Wellford hoped to secure Wrightrsquos partnership Neither overture resulted in a land
purchase and the quest for northern investment in Spotsylvania County failed8
Internal improvements in the region formed as one of John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos true
passions as he was involved personally in a number of projects over a number of years
Yet like his quest for northern investment in ore land Wellfordrsquos dreams of integrating
Fredericksburg within the nationrsquos growing transportation network never really came to
pass Plans for improving the Rappahannock River in order to link Fredericksburgrsquos
tidewater port to upriver markets date back to the late eighteenth century and by 1811 the
Virginia Legislature commissioned the Rappahannock Company to oversee the lsquoopening
clearing and extending the inland navigationrsquo of the river In 1816 state officials
commissioned an official survey of the route but these ambitious plans stalled Wellford
was a director of a later version of this firm called the RappahannockNavigation Company
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1343
which received corporate charters from the state in 1826 and 1828 Johnrsquos warehouse held
the lumber ready for the construction of locks he advertised for lsquo10 or fifteen able bodied
negro menrsquo to work on the project and at a groundbreaking ceremony offered a toast in
praise of the Virginia Board of Public Works lsquoThe fund of Internal Improvement ndash the
State helps those who help themselvesrsquo These ambitious plans again ran into trouble as
company officials deemed the Rappahannock navigation inadequate by 18369 In 1831
Wellford was unanimously elected secretary and treasurer of the Fredericksburg and
Potomac Company a firm that sought to build a turnpike then railroad linking the city to a
steamboat landing on Potomac Creek Although the founders predicted their system could
carry merchandise from Fredericksburg to Baltimore in 10 hours or less this plan also
failed to materialise A year later he helped secure a charter for the Fredericksburg and
Potomac Creek Railroad Company which apparently failed to attract enough stock
subscriptions Finally in 1835 John agreed to serve as a manager of the Rappahannock and
Blue Ridge Railroad yet another plan that failed to come to fruition10
All of these unfinished projects must have been frustrating for John Spotswood
Wellford Although he remained a prominent public figure in Fredericksburg an
upstanding member of the Presbyterian Church the anchor of a well-respected and
influential family and a successful banker and merchant his attempts to bring industrial
prosperity to his home town seemed mired in mediocrity So while he maintained a web of
contacts in these social economic and political circles this social capital was somewhat
limited in its efficacy In many ways he developed lsquopersonalrsquo rather than lsquosocialrsquo capital
as his various connections with fellow landholders Whigs and internal improvement
boosters did not translate into real change in the region even as they marked him
individually as one of the leading advocates of industrial development in the
Fredericksburg area This was reflected by Wellfordrsquos rather unconventional role as the
scion of a wealthy Virginia family he owned land but seemed more interested in
cultivating its iron ore than coaxing tobacco or wheat out of the ground Wellford owned
slaves but also belonged to an anti-slavery society He came from a well-connected and
affluent Fredericksburg family but sought to make connections with northern investors
and merchants throughout his career Like many entrepreneurs across history John
Spotswood Wellford demonstrated a willingness to break from the expected trajectory of
his life ndash he wanted to use his personal capital for material gain In 1836 he would get that
chance during the short-lived boom in the Virginia charcoal iron trade
The birth of Catharine Furnace
lsquoThe construction of the hearth is a business in which the founder takes an active partrsquo
Frederick Overman wrote in the 1854 version of his extensive guidebook The Manufacture
of Iron in All its Various Branches As the furnace superintendent drawing an annual salary
of $1000 John Spotswood Wellford undoubtedly involved himself in the early
construction and operation of the furnace First and foremost he gave the furnace its
distinctive name lsquoCatharinersquo after his mother Catharine Yates Wellford But perhaps
more importantly Wellford kept a careful account of the cost of labour and materials that
went into the making of Catharine Furnace This account book provides an invaluable
insight into the furnace operation Wellfordrsquos entries shown in Figure 1 were terse in the
fashion of most nineteenth-century business account books Nonetheless these entries
provide a narrative history of both the day-to-day and long-term goals of the enterprise
Even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company was a corporate
endeavour John Spotswood Wellford ran the business much like a proprietary owner
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1344 SP Adams
Figure 1 Typical page of John Wellfordrsquos Catharine Furnace Account Book Source Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC)
By the end of 1837 the construction tab had run to a little more than $7000 When coupled
with the cost of acquiring land for charcoaling and mining ore this put Catharine Furnace
well within the cost range of the average Virginia charcoal furnace but much beyond the
range of most individual proprietors11
Iron furnaces were usually lsquoblown inrsquo in the early spring so it was important that
Catharine Furnace be completed in the winter of 1837ndash38 By early January a set of hearth
stones had been delivered to the site for inside lining of the furnace the final brickwork on
the furnace was being completed and the furnacersquos lsquosuction enginersquo (most likely a steam
engine for operating the furnace bellows) had been repaired and was ready for use
A sizeable work force of at least 86 slaves was in place with 19 slaves allocated to work in
various ore mines in the area Although no official production figures are extant Wellfordrsquos
account book notes that by May of 1838 the first shipment of iron was hauled away from
the area The shipment of new hearth stones in late September signalled a successful first
blast as furnace linings often wore away as workers continually fed the blast12
Making the iron was only one facet of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Companyrsquos business how they could transport their goods to market was an entirely
different struggle Overland travel was the simplest and most common option but also the
most expensive Virginiarsquos charcoal iron operations needed to be located near ample
supplies of ore and timber which usually meant they were in sparsely populated areas
When Rockbridge Countyrsquos William Weaver sought to expand his iron manufacturing
business in 1826 he purposely located his new forge close to his blast furnace so as to
minimise the distance that the heavy iron pigs would travel in wagons or carts The Union
Forge in Patrick County paid $8 per ton to ship its iron only a short distance to market
In this regard Catharine Furnacersquos close proximity to Fredericksburg and its flat terrain
gave it an advantage over other Virginia charcoal iron furnaces the majority of which were
located in the mountainous counties in theValley ofVirginia The Swift RunGap Turnpike
commonly known as the Orange Turnpike served as Spotsylvania Countyrsquos major road
project The arearsquos distinctive red clay in the words of one historian was lsquosticky as fish glue
when wetrsquo and caked aroundwagon wheels Conditions on this road were so bad moreover
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1345
that in 1823 a lawsuit found the company negligent of regular repair and maintenance
Hauling iron in these conditions could be done over short distances only which ruled out
most overland routes for shipping iron from Spotsylvania County13
Whenever possible Virginia ironmakers shipped their products to market via natural
or improved waterways William Weaverrsquos placement of his new forge in 1826 sought to
reduce overland shipping costs but also put manufacturing iron within easy distance of the
North River where flat-bottomed boats could ship directly to major market centres When
the James River and Kanawha Canal reached the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains at
Lynchburg in 1840 the ironmakers of the Valley saw a dramatic reduction in
transportation costs to Richmond Even though John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos dream of easy
water navigation on the upper Rappahannock failed to materialise Fredericksburg still
served as an important link to the eastern seaboard via its tidewater port An 1835 guide to
Virginia referred to Fredericksburg as a lsquoprosperous portrsquo and noted that its wharves could
handle vessels up to 140 tons Local officials felt that they could have more support in
developing seaborne traffic from their state and federal governments In 1836 citizens
petitioned Congress to make Fredericksburg an official port of entry ndash ships had to pay
collection duties at Tappahannock 60 miles lower on the Rappahannock River ndash arguing
that this has caused lsquogreat trouble expense and inconveniencersquo to their merchants
Nonetheless iron could be shipped by water out of Fredericksburg at a fraction of the cost
of land transport and this would remain the major outlet for Wellfordrsquos iron business
throughout the antebellum period14
Fredericksburgrsquos connection to Virginiarsquos railway network was provided by the
Richmond Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad Company Chartered in 1834 this
railroad at first contained a rare and controversial clause that gave it the exclusive rights to
build a rail line between Richmond and Washington DC The Supreme Court struck down
this clause but the RFampP nonetheless served as the major north ndash south artery for eastern
Virginia by linking Fredericksburg to Richmond in 1837 The RFampP later built a branch to
Aquia Creek in 1842 which connected Fredericksburg to Washington DC via steamboat
Unfortunately many of these transportation projects were limited at the time Wellford
turned to iron manufacturing as the many failures in the regionrsquos internal improvements
kept Fredericksburg on the margins of Virginiarsquos budding industrial economy
One geographer notes that as Alexandria expanded from the north and Richmond
extended from the south by 1835 Fredericksburg lsquodid not reflect a tightly integrated
settlement system and this pervasive weakness highlighted the fragile underpinnings of the
local economyrsquo15
Despite the unsteady connections to market John Spotswood Wellford successfully
brought Catharine Furnace into producing iron in short order Unfortunately the price of
iron plunged right at the time that the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Company started selling it The economic downturn on the heels of the Panic of 1837
pushed iron prices to about half ndash $25 to $22 a ton ndash the level that they had been in the
previous year Luckily the company had a number of close ties with potential customers
$140080 worth of Catharine Furnace pig iron went to the Fredericksburg Union
Manufacturing Company in 1838 and another $111800 in the following year Undoubtedly
the presence of two Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company stockholders
William Crump and Edward Carmichael on the board of this local firm helped close that
sale Wellfordrsquos account book suggests that most of Catharine Furnacersquos initial production
made its way to the Tredegar Iron Company in Richmond where it would have most likely
been made into bar rails in Tredegarrsquos new rolling mill As Francis Deane served as both a
major stockholder in the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1346 SP Adams
the President of the Tredegar Iron Company the purchase of $2500 ndash or 55 of Catharine
Furnacersquos sales in 1838 ndash worth of pig iron benefited both firms16
John hoped to reach markets outside the Old Dominion in Catharine Furnacersquos initial
years of iron production His years spent working the dry goods trade in the North offered
some contacts his extensive family connections offered other potential forms of social
capital While his younger brother Charles Carter Wellford was in New York City on
business in 1838 John shipped a sample of Catharine Furnace iron for testing in that
market The iron must have answered relatively well as Wood Johnston amp Burritt a dry
goods firm in New York City with ties to Richmond Virginia purchased $22818 worth of
iron from Wellford that same year Three years later Wood Johnston and Burritt sold
another $116729 worth of Catharine Furnace iron shipped to them via the schooner
Andrew Browne The only other out-of-state customer in 1838 was CG Morris of
Charleston South Carolina who purchased $22818 worth of pig iron and sash weights
from Wellford17
The quest for new markets continued over the next few years with varying levels of
success In February of 1839 Wellford sold two tons of iron to a customer in the District of
Columbia No additional entries appear for this particular buyer so it seems that Catharine
Furnace iron did not take off in the Washington area That same year Wellford shipped six
tons of pig iron to Boston at $2751 per ton The New England market seemed a bit more
promising as Wellford received $291568 in sales from Charles Dyer of Providence
This was most likely pig iron for use by the Phoenix Iron Foundry Company a Providence
firm that manufactured various finished iron products such as gear wheels and specialised
machine tools In 1841 Wellford noted in his account book that lsquoiron was taken to
Portland to try the marketrsquo by Captain Freeman Smith and that Smith sold at least three
tons at $2632 per ton in Maine18
In its early years the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company exploited
Francis Deanersquos high position in Tredegar Iron Company thus making personal
connections between the incorporators essential to the firmrsquos early survival Deane had
been present in the creation of many Virginia ironworks and his personal connections in the
state trade were unparalleled In 1839 alone Tredegar purchased $16500 ndash probably over
500 tons worth ndash of iron from Catharine Furnace As an incorporator of the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company Deane had the opportunity to enrich both his
primary employer as well as his Fredericksburg investment by purchasing pig iron from
Catharine Furnace The following year however sales to Tredegar slowed to $3500 and no
more major transactions between the two companies occurred after 1840 This was in part
due to the financial problems suffered by the TredegarWorks and in particular the result of
Deanersquos inability to sell the firmrsquos products By 1841 the fortunes of the Tredegar Works
were in the words of Kathleen Bruce at a very lsquolow ebbrsquo and Deane was on his way out as
the companyrsquos chief executive the following year Tredegarrsquos ties with Fredericksburg
continued after Deanersquos departure Joseph Reid Anderson contacted John Spotswood
Wellford in the summer of 1841 to inquire about introducing Tredegar iron in
Fredericksburg Apparently the two had discussed the project in Washington DC and
Anderson offered Wellford work as an agent of the Tredegar Iron Works lsquoFrom the prices
paid as I understand and quantity of country iron shipped there from [Richmond]rsquo
Andersonwrote lsquoas well as the high character of the Tred Iron at present I am led to believe
that advantage to all concerned may accrue from its introduction into that marketrsquo Some
Catharine Furnace iron was sold out of Tredegarrsquos yard in Richmond as David J Burr amp
Co purchased seventeen tons in 1841 found that load wanting in quality and so asked
Wellford to replace the iron In the summer of 1845 a manager at Tredegar offered to
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1347
purchase 60 or 70 tons of lsquohigh and mottled Pig Ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace at the
relatively high rate of $28 per ton19
Making shot and shell for Washington
Following Deanersquos departure from Richmond the future of Catharine Furnace was even
more in the hands of John Spotswood Wellford In a sense he used this turn of events to
turn his individual connections ndash in this case much more lsquopersonalrsquo than lsquosocialrsquo capital ndash
to the benefit of his ironmaking business In 1841 Wellford increased his individual
ownership in the company to a little over 40 through the purchase of a controlling
amount of capital stock from one of the original incorporators His son William Wellford
also held Edward Carmichaelrsquos share in trust thus giving the Wellford family functional
command over the firm as they controlled 60 of the corporation The first three full years
of operation at Catharine Furnace had seen sales totals of $450191 in 1838 $18376 in
1839 and $677568 in 1840 ndash a total combined revenue of $2965359 Revenues thus
lagged well behind the accumulated operating costs of the furnace that had run to
$6874891 by 1840 Figure 2 shows this trend Clearly a new business strategy was
needed in order to make this endeavour work as Catharine Furnace had difficulties
breaking into various private markets In the summer of 1841 John Spotswood Wellford
Francis Deane and Edward Carmichael all travelled to Washington DC to seek ordnance
contracts from the United States War Department Like its earlier connections with
Tredegar the firmrsquos directors sought to turn their social capital into financial success 20
As it turns out contracting with the federal government suited Catharine Furnace quite
well so long as John Spotswood Wellford was in charge Ordnance contracts were
arranged between the War or Navy departments and individuals so the status and
reputation of an individual contractor weighed heavy on the process On 11 September
1841 Wellford signed a contract with the Navy to deliver 70000 rounds of 32 lb solid
shot at three cents a pound to Gosport Naval Yard in Norfolk Virginia The contract came
Figure 2 Estimates of operating costs and sales at Catharine Furnace 1837 ndash 46 Source Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1348 SP Adams
into force on 2 February 1842 with the final delivery of shot taking place by 31 January
1844 Pending inspection and satisfaction by the Navy Wellford would receive $67200
from the federal government In the spring of 1842 Catharine Furnace obtained shot
patterns from James Walker That summer at least five moulders William H Ferguson
William Pulham R Parker Nicholas Wharton and A Sutherland were hard at work
making 32 lb solid shot from Catharine Furnace iron and in June of 1842 Wellford sent
his first shipment of 5230 shot to Norfolk Naval records indicate that the ordnance officers
at Gosport received over 24000 shot by the end of 1842 Shipments tended to occur fairly
regularly and Catharine Furnace produced an impressive amount of ordnance in a
relatively short period of time as illustrated in Table 1 Assuming that each piece of 32 lb
solid shot actually weighed 32 pounds ndash an assumption that did not always hold true for
nineteenth-century naval ordnance ndash then the estimated value of Wellfordrsquos contract in
1842 alone was roughly $232089621
On the surface Catharine Furnacersquos success with military contracting put the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company on a strong trajectory With the
federal government providing a strong income stream Wellford might have parlayed his
success in ordnance into wider markets for his iron Historians of technology have
provided many examples in which antebellum military enterprise helped reorganise and
refine production techniques in northern government installations like the armouries at
Springfield Massachusetts and Philadelphia as well as with private contractors like
Connecticutrsquos Samuel Colt Virginiarsquos Harpers Ferry Armory exhibited a less than
exemplary record with regard to streamlining the production of muskets and small arms
But in the end even isolated Harpers Ferry entered the modern industrial age So at least
among northern industries military enterprise was in the words of Merritt Roe Smith a
lsquokey ingredient in the evolution of complex technological systemsrsquo and served as a critical
factor in that regionrsquos antebellum industrialisation22
Rather than diversify its production line or markets Catharine Furnacersquos manager
expanded further into the highly volatile ordnance trade Using his personal connections
with the Navy Wellford secured yet another contract for 70000 32 lb solid shot in
February of 1843 The terms of the contract were the same as the 1841 deal although this
time Wellford had less than a year to complete it Since he shipped only about a third of
this amount from Catharine Furnace in 1842 it is questionable whether or not Wellford
expected to produce all of the contracted shot at his own works It was not uncommon for
contractors even if they owned or operated an iron furnace themselves to sub-contract
Table 1 32 lb solid shot shipped to Gosport naval yard from Catharine Furnace 1842
Amount Received Estimated Value ($)
22 June 1842 5250 504000 22 June 1842 2623 251808 18 July 1842 3507 336672 4 August 1842 1692 162432 20 August 1842 2227 213792 8 September 1842 2102 201792 22 September 1842 1401 134496 3 October 1842 1874 179904 3 November 1842 3500 336000 Total 24176 2320896
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1349
production out to other firms at times In fact Wellford notes in his account book that 118
tons of pig iron shipped from the Fredericksburg wharf to Catharine Furnace in 1842 to be
melted into ball in his cupola furnaces Whether or not he had purchased this iron from
other furnaces or recalled it from pig iron meant for sale elsewhere is unclear But a year
later Wellford paid for 55 cartloads or 275 tons of pig iron from the Fredericksburg
wharf back to Catharine Furnace noting that this iron had been sent back from Boston
unsold lsquoon acct of its being so whitersquo and lsquowas therefore worked into ballrsquo23
Producing shot for the Navy secured a solid stream of income for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as a steady demand for iron for the
workers at Catharine Furnace These ordnance contracts required constant vigilance
however as Wellford visited Washington DC on numerous occasions to maintain his
personal connections with the War Department He also paid William Ridgely $8500 lsquofor
arranging accts and settling with [the] Naval Boardrsquo in 1842 Ridgely was a long-time
employee of the Navy who had been the Chief Clerk of the Naval Commissioners until
September of 1842 when he took a new position as Chief Clerk to the Bureau of Navy
Yards and Docks Sporadic payments to Ridgely ranging from $2000 to $10000
continued over the next few years but Wellfordrsquos entries do not give a full account of the
services rendered to him It is likely that Wellfordrsquos various contacts in Washington
provided him with valuable information When he learned that a Baltimore firm had failed
to supply 5000 cannon shot and that inspection officials had rejected 5000 additional units
Wellford wrote to Commodore WM Crane to see if he could provide any information
about securing a contract for himself to make up the 10000 in lost shot to the Navy24
Wellford also tried to squeeze larger profit margins out of the contract by rearranging
one of Catharine Furnacersquos great economic disadvantages ndash its high cost of transportation
The 1843 contract for example had an allowance of $2 per ton from Catharine Furnace to
Fredericksburg and another $1 per ton from Fredericksburg to Gosport In March of 1843
a naval official informed Wellford that lsquoafter reciting the price to be given for the shot
transportation to Fredericksburg and freight that no other allowance is to be madersquo for
shipping shot to Norfolk Whether or not the inspection of the ordnance occurred at
the furnace or at the naval yard was another factor in making contracts profitable Shot
and shell that was rejected at Catharine Furnace could be recast cheaply on the spot
rejected ordnance at Gosport needed to be shipped back to the furnace at the companyrsquos
expense Shipments to Gosport in the summer of 1843 were delayed by late arrival of an
inspection officer to Fredericksburg Some years later Wellford complained to the Navy
that their insistence upon inspections at the yard increased his already prohibitive
transportation costs25
Needless to say Wellford found ordnance a lucrative business for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company By 1843 Wellfordrsquos contracts with the War
Department were providing nearly all of Catharine Furnacersquos income This strategy
carried some risk as Wellford lost out on a contract to provide shot and shell for the Navy
in 1844 This contract went to the Tredegar Company now under the leadership of Joseph
Reid Anderson and making not only basic ordnance like shot and shell but also casting
cannon for the Federal government Like Catharine Furnace Tredegar drew upon strong
personal connections to Washington officials to secure these contracts Eastern Virginiarsquos
iron trade therefore relied almost completely on the federal statersquos demand for ordnance
This dependence proved tenuous when Wellfordrsquos relationship with the Navy soured in
1845 to the point that he was ordered to send back the governmentrsquos shot gauge gauge
plate and cylinders as well as any other instruments for shot inspection26
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1350 SP Adams
Wellford found making shot for the Navy to be a financially rewarding endeavour
even as it carried risks In a memorandum written into his account book he justified a
$344450 commission or 5 on his Navy contract in 1843 for lsquofurnishing the required
security and taking the contract in my name for better or for worsersquo lsquoThis contract I gave
the furnace of the advantage ofrsquo he continued lsquoand I do not hesitate to say that I could
have sold it for a profit of 10 per cent [] I would give that to day for a similar onersquo
Completing the Navyrsquos contract on 32 lb shot he argued in late 1844 kept him lsquo5 days in
the week absent from his familyrsquo and so he considered his personal charge of $122191 on
the yearrsquos receipts to be perfectly reasonable Wellford had reason to value his experience
with the Navy as he received $3226320 worth of contracts in the 1844 ndash45 fiscal year to
provide shot and shell for the Navyrsquos land-based fortifications These contracts accounted
for 272 of the Navyrsquos expenditure for this purpose and it made Wellford the single
largest naval ordnance contractor in the nation Losing this lucrative stream of income hurt
the future financial prospects of Catharine Furnace27
Rather than dwell on the failures with the Navy Wellford jumped into the manufacture
of 8 and 10 inch artillery shells and 12 and 24 lb solid shot for the US Army by signing a
$2442827 contract in 1844 He also upped his own commission to 10 arguing again
that he was remaining personally responsible for the contract lsquoThis contract I gave the
Furnace the advantage ofrsquo he argued in defence of his $241697 from the companyrsquos
account Rather than sub-contract out the work to other ironworks Wellford reminded his
partners that he planned to keep all of the Army business at Catharine Furnace He did not
lsquohesitate to say I could have sold it for a much larger advancersquo for his own personal profit
In the summer of 1844 Wellford rushed shell patterns from an armoury in Washington
and after receiving guidance from ordnance officer Colonel George Talcott was shipping
shot and shells to Fort Monroe For this job Wellford secured a favourable rate of 4 cents
for 10 inch shells 5 cents for 8 inch shells and 314 cents for 12 and 24 lb solid shot
Although the initial contract was for a little under $25000 Wellford continued to make
shot and shell for the Army well into 1846 by signing several small contracts in 1845 and a
large $1244469 order in 1846 Since Wellford upped his commission to 15 for that later
work he clearly felt that his personal stake in the army contracts merited a larger share of
the companyrsquos profits28
John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal fortunes with Catharine Furnace had finally
seemed to turn the corner By 1846 he had acquired a controlling interest in the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company by purchasing more shares in the
corporation bringing ownership stake to three-fifths Charles Dyer of Providence
moreover had recently concluded that lsquothis is as good if not the best market in the country
to dispose of all he has or may in future makersquo for Catharine Furnace pig iron Wellford
had 150 to 200 tons of pig iron on hand at the Fredericksburg wharf ready to ship out to the
Northeast Although the prospects of many Virginia charcoal iron furnaces seemed to be
on the decline in the face of Pennsylvaniarsquos anthracite ironmakers Wellfordrsquos connections
with the War Department and the suggestion of a niche market for Catharine Furnacersquos
lsquogray ironrsquo in Providence offered a glimpse of hope in late 184629
Following the outbreak of the War with Mexico Navy officials approached Wellford
about a new contract for shot and shell On 3 September 1846 the head of the Navyrsquos
Bureau of Ordnance Commodore Louis Warrington praised Wellfordrsquos past service and
in light of a shortage of shot and shell offered Wellford the opportunity to provide 10000
units of solid 32 lb shot and 7000 shells for 32 lb cannons for the Navy Wellford
responded in the positive as Commodore Warrington sent out a contract in October or
November of 1846 for his signature However Wellford never signed the contract and in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1351
late December of 1846 the residents of Fredericksburg were startled to discover that John
Spotswood Wellford the driving force behind so many social economic and political
movements in Spotsylvania County had died at the moment when Catharine Furnace
seemed on the brink of big success30
In the wake of Johnrsquos death the future direction of Catharine Furnace was in doubt
Edward Carmichael now living in Richmond attempted to assume control over Wellfordrsquos
Navy contract for 10000 32 lb shot and 7000 shells in early January 1847 As William
Wellford stalled in settling his fatherrsquos estate Carmichael argued that the Navy should
transfer the Catharine Furnace work to his authority Carmichael also undertook some
contracts to supply Army ordnance that he expected to be filled with Catharine Furnace
iron He immediately wrote to Fredericksburg asking for two or three pigs of lsquothe very best
Gray ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace to be sent to Richmond immediately so that he could
complete this contract at local forges In early February a lsquofearfulrsquo Carmichael advised
William to ship any remaining shot and shell on the Catharine Furnace grounds to Norfolk
by mid-March so as to fulfil any obligations he had to the Navy By late February William
had taken inventory of the remaining ordnance stock at Catharine Furnace and agreed to
ship the shot and shell on hand for the Army and to lsquomould the 24 lb Solid Shot and the 32
lb Sold Shot for the Navy with one workman on eachrsquo through mid-March The completion
of this final contract would be the last bit of ordnance manufacture done at Catharine
Furnace during the 1840s as William Wellford made clear in his correspondence that he
had no interest in pursuing the business further31
With John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos death then Catharine Furnacersquos future was in doubt
William Wellford Johnrsquos son became the de facto manager at the furnace although he
seemed to be a reluctant heir to this position William wrote to Edward Carmichael in early
1847 that lsquoI can by no means accept the execution of the Navy contractrsquo and that it
lsquoappears to be equally illegal for you and Mr C acting as surviving partners to undertake
itrsquo Because the Army and Navy contracted with individuals and not corporations John
Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal estate ndash not the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company ndash were the only ones authorised to complete any remaining
work Indeed the firmrsquos attorney had recently advised that William was only authorised to
continue Catharine Furnacersquos operations lsquofor the purpose of completing the execution of
any contracts which may have been entered into but not fully executed by his testator at
the time of his deathrsquo and that lsquoAt the death of Mr Wellford the partnership which existed
between himself amp others in the iron works ceased except for the purpose of completing
existing engagements and winding up the businessrsquo Only a few weeks later the trustee of
Francis Deanersquos share in the firm Richard H Cunningham announced that after several
meetings with William Wellford it was clear that he lsquohad no desire or intention of
purchasing the propertyrsquo and that the best course of action would be to liquidate the
physical assets of the corporation and ask $40000 for the lsquoEstate Fixtures and Mules (not
including any Pig Iron)rsquo By early April Fredericksburgrsquos Democratic Recorder
advertised the a June sale at auction of lsquoThe Catharine Furnace with Dwelling 4648 acres
of land containing iron ore well wooded fixtures patterns stock steam engine house
cupolas blacksmithrsquos tools ampc ampc with everything requisite for a complete iron
manufacturing establishmentrsquo32
Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
Was Catharine Furnace successful This is a difficult question to address without
understanding the early context in which the firm operated as well as its utter dependence
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1352 SP Adams
upon the personal capital of John Spotswood Wellford The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company struggled to find a reliable outlet for the products of Catharine
Furnace during its early history Local state and national trends created an unfavourable
atmosphere for starting an iron smelting operation during the late 1830s and early 1840s
John Wellford would have been well aware of his disadvantages in this regard As a longshy
time Fredericksburg resident with first-hand familiarity of the grandiose visions false
starts and frustrating stalls of local projects such as the Rappahannock Navigation
Company or the Fredericksburg and Potomac Creek Railroad Company Wellford
followed his entrepreneurial instincts into less traditional markets for ironmakers Rather
than wait for Fredericksburgrsquos prospects to magically reverse or dump his own financial
resources into a new improvement or manufacturing investment Wellford used his long
history of political and economic contacts to his firmrsquos advantage Military contracts
shifted the responsibility of success or failure into an entirely new area of risk ndash
Wellfordrsquos ability to maintain his contacts in the Navy and War departments and to spin
them into lucrative contracts for the production of shot and shell In the short term the
firmrsquos reliance upon government contracts saved Catharine Furnace and made the
operation profitable
In the long run though the dependency on John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal capital
bound the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company to its
owner and manager This was not the sort of social capital that could transfer easily to either
Johnrsquos family or his fellow incorporators In the end it was not Wellfordrsquos lack of
entrepreneurial talent that limited Catharine Furnacersquos long-term prospects but perhaps his
creative way of overcoming the various obstacles to profitable ironmaking that existed in
antebellum Virginia But just as traditional forms of financial capital need a strong
institutional environment to be effective so does social or personal capital need a
favourable context The Old Dominion for various reasons did not provide that favourable
context Wellfordrsquos case then offers an example of how his particular entrepreneurial
strategy offers up a short-term success story while at the same time exposing the difficult
context that industrial endeavours faced in the antebellum South
Local factors endemic to Fredericksburg for example played a large role in
amplifying the long-term weakness of relying upon personal rather than physical capital
for Catharine Furnace The most promising regional market Richmond essentially closed
up to Catharine Furnace pig iron by the early 1840s Once Francis Deane left the employ of
the Tredegar Company that firm failed to make massive purchases of Catharine Furnace
iron As the James River and Kanawha Canal linked the ironmakers of the Valley of
Virginia to Richmond moreover Catharine Furnace was further left out of the mix
Without the strong connections to market Wellfordrsquos successors most likely would have
continued to struggle to compete with other more integrated ironmakers In a larger sense
Fredericksburgrsquos entire manufacturing economy was being squeezed out of the picture
during the antebellum period as local boosters failed to make the necessary investments in
the regionrsquos physical infrastructure Geographer Keith Littlefield estimates that the city
lost control over 76 of the trade in its rural hinterland by 1860 as Richmond and
Alexandria expanded their commercial reach at Fredericksburgrsquos expense John
Wellfordrsquos own experience with failed turnpikes river improvements and railroads
during his pre-ironmaking days signalled a failure to secure a variety of market outlets for
Fredericksburgrsquos manufacturers Because Wellfordrsquos furnace produced pig iron ndash a high
bulk and low value commodity ndash shipping costs were a major factor in marketing its
products afar Since the cityrsquos commercial and manufacturing sector served a smaller and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
1342 SP Adams
Although he was a wealthy farmer slaveholder and a leading member of
Fredericksburg society John Spotswood Wellford developed political contacts that
aligned him with the Whig Party He first tested the political waters as a founding member
of Fredericksburgrsquos Anti-Jackson Committee in 1827 When Henry Clay visited
Fredericksburg a year later he received well-wishers and political aspirants at Wellfordrsquos
house Wellford followed Clay into the Whig Party where he served as a prominent figure
in Spotsylvania Countyrsquos local party apparatus In 1834 he participated prominently in a
convention that denounced President Jacksonrsquos removal of federal deposits from the Bank
of the United States chaired several Spotsylvania County Whig Party meetings and
headlined a formal request that Henry Clay come to Fredericksburg to do a lsquopublic
entertainmentrsquo in 1840 He joined the Fredericksburg Auxiliary to the American
Colonization Society in 1826 and served as a manager for several years Despite his
affiliation with the ACSrsquos mild form of anti-slavery John owned slaves throughout his
life In 1835 he was named to a committee to explore lsquomeasures necessary to be adopted
in regard to the movements making in the Northern States with respect to the Abolition of
Slaveryrsquo Apparently mild anti-slavery initiatives sat well with John Spotswood Wellford
but any immediate threats to the lsquopeculiar institutionrsquo provoked an urgent response
His brother and close business associate Beverly soon thereafter joined the
Fredericksburg Anti-Abolition Committee7
Wellford needed help from outside Virginia in order to develop his landrsquos industrial
potential He found investment capital difficult to come by in Fredericksburg even though
he served on the Bank of Virginiarsquos board for many years John Majewski has
demonstrated that elsewhere in Virginia a similar dearth of investment capital for canal
and railroad development forced the state to subsidise ndash often poorly ndash the growth of the
Old Dominionrsquos transportation infrastructure Instead of state subsidies Wellford tried to
use his social capital here in the form of some northern contacts to develop the industrial
resources of his landholdings He wrote to the Philadelphia merchant and ironmaster
Samuel G Wright in 1823 touting the richness of Spotsylvania Countyrsquos ore deposits
After sending Wright a sample he wrote that lsquoI am informed the land abounds with it it is
to be found in great quantities of the same quality sent you and that near the surfacersquo
Wellford reported that the tract for sale was lsquoabout ten miles on a turnpike road from this
place to the land I understand the tract is a large one and for sale the land is generally very
poor and consequently may be purchased cheaprsquo and offered to lsquosend you a few Tons of
the ore where you could better judge of the propriety of working the purchasersquo Nearly four
years later Wellford still offered hopes that Wright would invest in ore mining Even
though he inadvertently revealed the lack of indigenous investment in Spotsylvania ore
fields by claiming lsquothere is no fear of competition so you will lose nothing by a little
delayrsquo Wellford hoped to secure Wrightrsquos partnership Neither overture resulted in a land
purchase and the quest for northern investment in Spotsylvania County failed8
Internal improvements in the region formed as one of John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos true
passions as he was involved personally in a number of projects over a number of years
Yet like his quest for northern investment in ore land Wellfordrsquos dreams of integrating
Fredericksburg within the nationrsquos growing transportation network never really came to
pass Plans for improving the Rappahannock River in order to link Fredericksburgrsquos
tidewater port to upriver markets date back to the late eighteenth century and by 1811 the
Virginia Legislature commissioned the Rappahannock Company to oversee the lsquoopening
clearing and extending the inland navigationrsquo of the river In 1816 state officials
commissioned an official survey of the route but these ambitious plans stalled Wellford
was a director of a later version of this firm called the RappahannockNavigation Company
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1343
which received corporate charters from the state in 1826 and 1828 Johnrsquos warehouse held
the lumber ready for the construction of locks he advertised for lsquo10 or fifteen able bodied
negro menrsquo to work on the project and at a groundbreaking ceremony offered a toast in
praise of the Virginia Board of Public Works lsquoThe fund of Internal Improvement ndash the
State helps those who help themselvesrsquo These ambitious plans again ran into trouble as
company officials deemed the Rappahannock navigation inadequate by 18369 In 1831
Wellford was unanimously elected secretary and treasurer of the Fredericksburg and
Potomac Company a firm that sought to build a turnpike then railroad linking the city to a
steamboat landing on Potomac Creek Although the founders predicted their system could
carry merchandise from Fredericksburg to Baltimore in 10 hours or less this plan also
failed to materialise A year later he helped secure a charter for the Fredericksburg and
Potomac Creek Railroad Company which apparently failed to attract enough stock
subscriptions Finally in 1835 John agreed to serve as a manager of the Rappahannock and
Blue Ridge Railroad yet another plan that failed to come to fruition10
All of these unfinished projects must have been frustrating for John Spotswood
Wellford Although he remained a prominent public figure in Fredericksburg an
upstanding member of the Presbyterian Church the anchor of a well-respected and
influential family and a successful banker and merchant his attempts to bring industrial
prosperity to his home town seemed mired in mediocrity So while he maintained a web of
contacts in these social economic and political circles this social capital was somewhat
limited in its efficacy In many ways he developed lsquopersonalrsquo rather than lsquosocialrsquo capital
as his various connections with fellow landholders Whigs and internal improvement
boosters did not translate into real change in the region even as they marked him
individually as one of the leading advocates of industrial development in the
Fredericksburg area This was reflected by Wellfordrsquos rather unconventional role as the
scion of a wealthy Virginia family he owned land but seemed more interested in
cultivating its iron ore than coaxing tobacco or wheat out of the ground Wellford owned
slaves but also belonged to an anti-slavery society He came from a well-connected and
affluent Fredericksburg family but sought to make connections with northern investors
and merchants throughout his career Like many entrepreneurs across history John
Spotswood Wellford demonstrated a willingness to break from the expected trajectory of
his life ndash he wanted to use his personal capital for material gain In 1836 he would get that
chance during the short-lived boom in the Virginia charcoal iron trade
The birth of Catharine Furnace
lsquoThe construction of the hearth is a business in which the founder takes an active partrsquo
Frederick Overman wrote in the 1854 version of his extensive guidebook The Manufacture
of Iron in All its Various Branches As the furnace superintendent drawing an annual salary
of $1000 John Spotswood Wellford undoubtedly involved himself in the early
construction and operation of the furnace First and foremost he gave the furnace its
distinctive name lsquoCatharinersquo after his mother Catharine Yates Wellford But perhaps
more importantly Wellford kept a careful account of the cost of labour and materials that
went into the making of Catharine Furnace This account book provides an invaluable
insight into the furnace operation Wellfordrsquos entries shown in Figure 1 were terse in the
fashion of most nineteenth-century business account books Nonetheless these entries
provide a narrative history of both the day-to-day and long-term goals of the enterprise
Even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company was a corporate
endeavour John Spotswood Wellford ran the business much like a proprietary owner
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1344 SP Adams
Figure 1 Typical page of John Wellfordrsquos Catharine Furnace Account Book Source Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC)
By the end of 1837 the construction tab had run to a little more than $7000 When coupled
with the cost of acquiring land for charcoaling and mining ore this put Catharine Furnace
well within the cost range of the average Virginia charcoal furnace but much beyond the
range of most individual proprietors11
Iron furnaces were usually lsquoblown inrsquo in the early spring so it was important that
Catharine Furnace be completed in the winter of 1837ndash38 By early January a set of hearth
stones had been delivered to the site for inside lining of the furnace the final brickwork on
the furnace was being completed and the furnacersquos lsquosuction enginersquo (most likely a steam
engine for operating the furnace bellows) had been repaired and was ready for use
A sizeable work force of at least 86 slaves was in place with 19 slaves allocated to work in
various ore mines in the area Although no official production figures are extant Wellfordrsquos
account book notes that by May of 1838 the first shipment of iron was hauled away from
the area The shipment of new hearth stones in late September signalled a successful first
blast as furnace linings often wore away as workers continually fed the blast12
Making the iron was only one facet of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Companyrsquos business how they could transport their goods to market was an entirely
different struggle Overland travel was the simplest and most common option but also the
most expensive Virginiarsquos charcoal iron operations needed to be located near ample
supplies of ore and timber which usually meant they were in sparsely populated areas
When Rockbridge Countyrsquos William Weaver sought to expand his iron manufacturing
business in 1826 he purposely located his new forge close to his blast furnace so as to
minimise the distance that the heavy iron pigs would travel in wagons or carts The Union
Forge in Patrick County paid $8 per ton to ship its iron only a short distance to market
In this regard Catharine Furnacersquos close proximity to Fredericksburg and its flat terrain
gave it an advantage over other Virginia charcoal iron furnaces the majority of which were
located in the mountainous counties in theValley ofVirginia The Swift RunGap Turnpike
commonly known as the Orange Turnpike served as Spotsylvania Countyrsquos major road
project The arearsquos distinctive red clay in the words of one historian was lsquosticky as fish glue
when wetrsquo and caked aroundwagon wheels Conditions on this road were so bad moreover
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1345
that in 1823 a lawsuit found the company negligent of regular repair and maintenance
Hauling iron in these conditions could be done over short distances only which ruled out
most overland routes for shipping iron from Spotsylvania County13
Whenever possible Virginia ironmakers shipped their products to market via natural
or improved waterways William Weaverrsquos placement of his new forge in 1826 sought to
reduce overland shipping costs but also put manufacturing iron within easy distance of the
North River where flat-bottomed boats could ship directly to major market centres When
the James River and Kanawha Canal reached the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains at
Lynchburg in 1840 the ironmakers of the Valley saw a dramatic reduction in
transportation costs to Richmond Even though John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos dream of easy
water navigation on the upper Rappahannock failed to materialise Fredericksburg still
served as an important link to the eastern seaboard via its tidewater port An 1835 guide to
Virginia referred to Fredericksburg as a lsquoprosperous portrsquo and noted that its wharves could
handle vessels up to 140 tons Local officials felt that they could have more support in
developing seaborne traffic from their state and federal governments In 1836 citizens
petitioned Congress to make Fredericksburg an official port of entry ndash ships had to pay
collection duties at Tappahannock 60 miles lower on the Rappahannock River ndash arguing
that this has caused lsquogreat trouble expense and inconveniencersquo to their merchants
Nonetheless iron could be shipped by water out of Fredericksburg at a fraction of the cost
of land transport and this would remain the major outlet for Wellfordrsquos iron business
throughout the antebellum period14
Fredericksburgrsquos connection to Virginiarsquos railway network was provided by the
Richmond Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad Company Chartered in 1834 this
railroad at first contained a rare and controversial clause that gave it the exclusive rights to
build a rail line between Richmond and Washington DC The Supreme Court struck down
this clause but the RFampP nonetheless served as the major north ndash south artery for eastern
Virginia by linking Fredericksburg to Richmond in 1837 The RFampP later built a branch to
Aquia Creek in 1842 which connected Fredericksburg to Washington DC via steamboat
Unfortunately many of these transportation projects were limited at the time Wellford
turned to iron manufacturing as the many failures in the regionrsquos internal improvements
kept Fredericksburg on the margins of Virginiarsquos budding industrial economy
One geographer notes that as Alexandria expanded from the north and Richmond
extended from the south by 1835 Fredericksburg lsquodid not reflect a tightly integrated
settlement system and this pervasive weakness highlighted the fragile underpinnings of the
local economyrsquo15
Despite the unsteady connections to market John Spotswood Wellford successfully
brought Catharine Furnace into producing iron in short order Unfortunately the price of
iron plunged right at the time that the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Company started selling it The economic downturn on the heels of the Panic of 1837
pushed iron prices to about half ndash $25 to $22 a ton ndash the level that they had been in the
previous year Luckily the company had a number of close ties with potential customers
$140080 worth of Catharine Furnace pig iron went to the Fredericksburg Union
Manufacturing Company in 1838 and another $111800 in the following year Undoubtedly
the presence of two Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company stockholders
William Crump and Edward Carmichael on the board of this local firm helped close that
sale Wellfordrsquos account book suggests that most of Catharine Furnacersquos initial production
made its way to the Tredegar Iron Company in Richmond where it would have most likely
been made into bar rails in Tredegarrsquos new rolling mill As Francis Deane served as both a
major stockholder in the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1346 SP Adams
the President of the Tredegar Iron Company the purchase of $2500 ndash or 55 of Catharine
Furnacersquos sales in 1838 ndash worth of pig iron benefited both firms16
John hoped to reach markets outside the Old Dominion in Catharine Furnacersquos initial
years of iron production His years spent working the dry goods trade in the North offered
some contacts his extensive family connections offered other potential forms of social
capital While his younger brother Charles Carter Wellford was in New York City on
business in 1838 John shipped a sample of Catharine Furnace iron for testing in that
market The iron must have answered relatively well as Wood Johnston amp Burritt a dry
goods firm in New York City with ties to Richmond Virginia purchased $22818 worth of
iron from Wellford that same year Three years later Wood Johnston and Burritt sold
another $116729 worth of Catharine Furnace iron shipped to them via the schooner
Andrew Browne The only other out-of-state customer in 1838 was CG Morris of
Charleston South Carolina who purchased $22818 worth of pig iron and sash weights
from Wellford17
The quest for new markets continued over the next few years with varying levels of
success In February of 1839 Wellford sold two tons of iron to a customer in the District of
Columbia No additional entries appear for this particular buyer so it seems that Catharine
Furnace iron did not take off in the Washington area That same year Wellford shipped six
tons of pig iron to Boston at $2751 per ton The New England market seemed a bit more
promising as Wellford received $291568 in sales from Charles Dyer of Providence
This was most likely pig iron for use by the Phoenix Iron Foundry Company a Providence
firm that manufactured various finished iron products such as gear wheels and specialised
machine tools In 1841 Wellford noted in his account book that lsquoiron was taken to
Portland to try the marketrsquo by Captain Freeman Smith and that Smith sold at least three
tons at $2632 per ton in Maine18
In its early years the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company exploited
Francis Deanersquos high position in Tredegar Iron Company thus making personal
connections between the incorporators essential to the firmrsquos early survival Deane had
been present in the creation of many Virginia ironworks and his personal connections in the
state trade were unparalleled In 1839 alone Tredegar purchased $16500 ndash probably over
500 tons worth ndash of iron from Catharine Furnace As an incorporator of the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company Deane had the opportunity to enrich both his
primary employer as well as his Fredericksburg investment by purchasing pig iron from
Catharine Furnace The following year however sales to Tredegar slowed to $3500 and no
more major transactions between the two companies occurred after 1840 This was in part
due to the financial problems suffered by the TredegarWorks and in particular the result of
Deanersquos inability to sell the firmrsquos products By 1841 the fortunes of the Tredegar Works
were in the words of Kathleen Bruce at a very lsquolow ebbrsquo and Deane was on his way out as
the companyrsquos chief executive the following year Tredegarrsquos ties with Fredericksburg
continued after Deanersquos departure Joseph Reid Anderson contacted John Spotswood
Wellford in the summer of 1841 to inquire about introducing Tredegar iron in
Fredericksburg Apparently the two had discussed the project in Washington DC and
Anderson offered Wellford work as an agent of the Tredegar Iron Works lsquoFrom the prices
paid as I understand and quantity of country iron shipped there from [Richmond]rsquo
Andersonwrote lsquoas well as the high character of the Tred Iron at present I am led to believe
that advantage to all concerned may accrue from its introduction into that marketrsquo Some
Catharine Furnace iron was sold out of Tredegarrsquos yard in Richmond as David J Burr amp
Co purchased seventeen tons in 1841 found that load wanting in quality and so asked
Wellford to replace the iron In the summer of 1845 a manager at Tredegar offered to
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1347
purchase 60 or 70 tons of lsquohigh and mottled Pig Ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace at the
relatively high rate of $28 per ton19
Making shot and shell for Washington
Following Deanersquos departure from Richmond the future of Catharine Furnace was even
more in the hands of John Spotswood Wellford In a sense he used this turn of events to
turn his individual connections ndash in this case much more lsquopersonalrsquo than lsquosocialrsquo capital ndash
to the benefit of his ironmaking business In 1841 Wellford increased his individual
ownership in the company to a little over 40 through the purchase of a controlling
amount of capital stock from one of the original incorporators His son William Wellford
also held Edward Carmichaelrsquos share in trust thus giving the Wellford family functional
command over the firm as they controlled 60 of the corporation The first three full years
of operation at Catharine Furnace had seen sales totals of $450191 in 1838 $18376 in
1839 and $677568 in 1840 ndash a total combined revenue of $2965359 Revenues thus
lagged well behind the accumulated operating costs of the furnace that had run to
$6874891 by 1840 Figure 2 shows this trend Clearly a new business strategy was
needed in order to make this endeavour work as Catharine Furnace had difficulties
breaking into various private markets In the summer of 1841 John Spotswood Wellford
Francis Deane and Edward Carmichael all travelled to Washington DC to seek ordnance
contracts from the United States War Department Like its earlier connections with
Tredegar the firmrsquos directors sought to turn their social capital into financial success 20
As it turns out contracting with the federal government suited Catharine Furnace quite
well so long as John Spotswood Wellford was in charge Ordnance contracts were
arranged between the War or Navy departments and individuals so the status and
reputation of an individual contractor weighed heavy on the process On 11 September
1841 Wellford signed a contract with the Navy to deliver 70000 rounds of 32 lb solid
shot at three cents a pound to Gosport Naval Yard in Norfolk Virginia The contract came
Figure 2 Estimates of operating costs and sales at Catharine Furnace 1837 ndash 46 Source Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1348 SP Adams
into force on 2 February 1842 with the final delivery of shot taking place by 31 January
1844 Pending inspection and satisfaction by the Navy Wellford would receive $67200
from the federal government In the spring of 1842 Catharine Furnace obtained shot
patterns from James Walker That summer at least five moulders William H Ferguson
William Pulham R Parker Nicholas Wharton and A Sutherland were hard at work
making 32 lb solid shot from Catharine Furnace iron and in June of 1842 Wellford sent
his first shipment of 5230 shot to Norfolk Naval records indicate that the ordnance officers
at Gosport received over 24000 shot by the end of 1842 Shipments tended to occur fairly
regularly and Catharine Furnace produced an impressive amount of ordnance in a
relatively short period of time as illustrated in Table 1 Assuming that each piece of 32 lb
solid shot actually weighed 32 pounds ndash an assumption that did not always hold true for
nineteenth-century naval ordnance ndash then the estimated value of Wellfordrsquos contract in
1842 alone was roughly $232089621
On the surface Catharine Furnacersquos success with military contracting put the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company on a strong trajectory With the
federal government providing a strong income stream Wellford might have parlayed his
success in ordnance into wider markets for his iron Historians of technology have
provided many examples in which antebellum military enterprise helped reorganise and
refine production techniques in northern government installations like the armouries at
Springfield Massachusetts and Philadelphia as well as with private contractors like
Connecticutrsquos Samuel Colt Virginiarsquos Harpers Ferry Armory exhibited a less than
exemplary record with regard to streamlining the production of muskets and small arms
But in the end even isolated Harpers Ferry entered the modern industrial age So at least
among northern industries military enterprise was in the words of Merritt Roe Smith a
lsquokey ingredient in the evolution of complex technological systemsrsquo and served as a critical
factor in that regionrsquos antebellum industrialisation22
Rather than diversify its production line or markets Catharine Furnacersquos manager
expanded further into the highly volatile ordnance trade Using his personal connections
with the Navy Wellford secured yet another contract for 70000 32 lb solid shot in
February of 1843 The terms of the contract were the same as the 1841 deal although this
time Wellford had less than a year to complete it Since he shipped only about a third of
this amount from Catharine Furnace in 1842 it is questionable whether or not Wellford
expected to produce all of the contracted shot at his own works It was not uncommon for
contractors even if they owned or operated an iron furnace themselves to sub-contract
Table 1 32 lb solid shot shipped to Gosport naval yard from Catharine Furnace 1842
Amount Received Estimated Value ($)
22 June 1842 5250 504000 22 June 1842 2623 251808 18 July 1842 3507 336672 4 August 1842 1692 162432 20 August 1842 2227 213792 8 September 1842 2102 201792 22 September 1842 1401 134496 3 October 1842 1874 179904 3 November 1842 3500 336000 Total 24176 2320896
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1349
production out to other firms at times In fact Wellford notes in his account book that 118
tons of pig iron shipped from the Fredericksburg wharf to Catharine Furnace in 1842 to be
melted into ball in his cupola furnaces Whether or not he had purchased this iron from
other furnaces or recalled it from pig iron meant for sale elsewhere is unclear But a year
later Wellford paid for 55 cartloads or 275 tons of pig iron from the Fredericksburg
wharf back to Catharine Furnace noting that this iron had been sent back from Boston
unsold lsquoon acct of its being so whitersquo and lsquowas therefore worked into ballrsquo23
Producing shot for the Navy secured a solid stream of income for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as a steady demand for iron for the
workers at Catharine Furnace These ordnance contracts required constant vigilance
however as Wellford visited Washington DC on numerous occasions to maintain his
personal connections with the War Department He also paid William Ridgely $8500 lsquofor
arranging accts and settling with [the] Naval Boardrsquo in 1842 Ridgely was a long-time
employee of the Navy who had been the Chief Clerk of the Naval Commissioners until
September of 1842 when he took a new position as Chief Clerk to the Bureau of Navy
Yards and Docks Sporadic payments to Ridgely ranging from $2000 to $10000
continued over the next few years but Wellfordrsquos entries do not give a full account of the
services rendered to him It is likely that Wellfordrsquos various contacts in Washington
provided him with valuable information When he learned that a Baltimore firm had failed
to supply 5000 cannon shot and that inspection officials had rejected 5000 additional units
Wellford wrote to Commodore WM Crane to see if he could provide any information
about securing a contract for himself to make up the 10000 in lost shot to the Navy24
Wellford also tried to squeeze larger profit margins out of the contract by rearranging
one of Catharine Furnacersquos great economic disadvantages ndash its high cost of transportation
The 1843 contract for example had an allowance of $2 per ton from Catharine Furnace to
Fredericksburg and another $1 per ton from Fredericksburg to Gosport In March of 1843
a naval official informed Wellford that lsquoafter reciting the price to be given for the shot
transportation to Fredericksburg and freight that no other allowance is to be madersquo for
shipping shot to Norfolk Whether or not the inspection of the ordnance occurred at
the furnace or at the naval yard was another factor in making contracts profitable Shot
and shell that was rejected at Catharine Furnace could be recast cheaply on the spot
rejected ordnance at Gosport needed to be shipped back to the furnace at the companyrsquos
expense Shipments to Gosport in the summer of 1843 were delayed by late arrival of an
inspection officer to Fredericksburg Some years later Wellford complained to the Navy
that their insistence upon inspections at the yard increased his already prohibitive
transportation costs25
Needless to say Wellford found ordnance a lucrative business for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company By 1843 Wellfordrsquos contracts with the War
Department were providing nearly all of Catharine Furnacersquos income This strategy
carried some risk as Wellford lost out on a contract to provide shot and shell for the Navy
in 1844 This contract went to the Tredegar Company now under the leadership of Joseph
Reid Anderson and making not only basic ordnance like shot and shell but also casting
cannon for the Federal government Like Catharine Furnace Tredegar drew upon strong
personal connections to Washington officials to secure these contracts Eastern Virginiarsquos
iron trade therefore relied almost completely on the federal statersquos demand for ordnance
This dependence proved tenuous when Wellfordrsquos relationship with the Navy soured in
1845 to the point that he was ordered to send back the governmentrsquos shot gauge gauge
plate and cylinders as well as any other instruments for shot inspection26
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1350 SP Adams
Wellford found making shot for the Navy to be a financially rewarding endeavour
even as it carried risks In a memorandum written into his account book he justified a
$344450 commission or 5 on his Navy contract in 1843 for lsquofurnishing the required
security and taking the contract in my name for better or for worsersquo lsquoThis contract I gave
the furnace of the advantage ofrsquo he continued lsquoand I do not hesitate to say that I could
have sold it for a profit of 10 per cent [] I would give that to day for a similar onersquo
Completing the Navyrsquos contract on 32 lb shot he argued in late 1844 kept him lsquo5 days in
the week absent from his familyrsquo and so he considered his personal charge of $122191 on
the yearrsquos receipts to be perfectly reasonable Wellford had reason to value his experience
with the Navy as he received $3226320 worth of contracts in the 1844 ndash45 fiscal year to
provide shot and shell for the Navyrsquos land-based fortifications These contracts accounted
for 272 of the Navyrsquos expenditure for this purpose and it made Wellford the single
largest naval ordnance contractor in the nation Losing this lucrative stream of income hurt
the future financial prospects of Catharine Furnace27
Rather than dwell on the failures with the Navy Wellford jumped into the manufacture
of 8 and 10 inch artillery shells and 12 and 24 lb solid shot for the US Army by signing a
$2442827 contract in 1844 He also upped his own commission to 10 arguing again
that he was remaining personally responsible for the contract lsquoThis contract I gave the
Furnace the advantage ofrsquo he argued in defence of his $241697 from the companyrsquos
account Rather than sub-contract out the work to other ironworks Wellford reminded his
partners that he planned to keep all of the Army business at Catharine Furnace He did not
lsquohesitate to say I could have sold it for a much larger advancersquo for his own personal profit
In the summer of 1844 Wellford rushed shell patterns from an armoury in Washington
and after receiving guidance from ordnance officer Colonel George Talcott was shipping
shot and shells to Fort Monroe For this job Wellford secured a favourable rate of 4 cents
for 10 inch shells 5 cents for 8 inch shells and 314 cents for 12 and 24 lb solid shot
Although the initial contract was for a little under $25000 Wellford continued to make
shot and shell for the Army well into 1846 by signing several small contracts in 1845 and a
large $1244469 order in 1846 Since Wellford upped his commission to 15 for that later
work he clearly felt that his personal stake in the army contracts merited a larger share of
the companyrsquos profits28
John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal fortunes with Catharine Furnace had finally
seemed to turn the corner By 1846 he had acquired a controlling interest in the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company by purchasing more shares in the
corporation bringing ownership stake to three-fifths Charles Dyer of Providence
moreover had recently concluded that lsquothis is as good if not the best market in the country
to dispose of all he has or may in future makersquo for Catharine Furnace pig iron Wellford
had 150 to 200 tons of pig iron on hand at the Fredericksburg wharf ready to ship out to the
Northeast Although the prospects of many Virginia charcoal iron furnaces seemed to be
on the decline in the face of Pennsylvaniarsquos anthracite ironmakers Wellfordrsquos connections
with the War Department and the suggestion of a niche market for Catharine Furnacersquos
lsquogray ironrsquo in Providence offered a glimpse of hope in late 184629
Following the outbreak of the War with Mexico Navy officials approached Wellford
about a new contract for shot and shell On 3 September 1846 the head of the Navyrsquos
Bureau of Ordnance Commodore Louis Warrington praised Wellfordrsquos past service and
in light of a shortage of shot and shell offered Wellford the opportunity to provide 10000
units of solid 32 lb shot and 7000 shells for 32 lb cannons for the Navy Wellford
responded in the positive as Commodore Warrington sent out a contract in October or
November of 1846 for his signature However Wellford never signed the contract and in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1351
late December of 1846 the residents of Fredericksburg were startled to discover that John
Spotswood Wellford the driving force behind so many social economic and political
movements in Spotsylvania County had died at the moment when Catharine Furnace
seemed on the brink of big success30
In the wake of Johnrsquos death the future direction of Catharine Furnace was in doubt
Edward Carmichael now living in Richmond attempted to assume control over Wellfordrsquos
Navy contract for 10000 32 lb shot and 7000 shells in early January 1847 As William
Wellford stalled in settling his fatherrsquos estate Carmichael argued that the Navy should
transfer the Catharine Furnace work to his authority Carmichael also undertook some
contracts to supply Army ordnance that he expected to be filled with Catharine Furnace
iron He immediately wrote to Fredericksburg asking for two or three pigs of lsquothe very best
Gray ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace to be sent to Richmond immediately so that he could
complete this contract at local forges In early February a lsquofearfulrsquo Carmichael advised
William to ship any remaining shot and shell on the Catharine Furnace grounds to Norfolk
by mid-March so as to fulfil any obligations he had to the Navy By late February William
had taken inventory of the remaining ordnance stock at Catharine Furnace and agreed to
ship the shot and shell on hand for the Army and to lsquomould the 24 lb Solid Shot and the 32
lb Sold Shot for the Navy with one workman on eachrsquo through mid-March The completion
of this final contract would be the last bit of ordnance manufacture done at Catharine
Furnace during the 1840s as William Wellford made clear in his correspondence that he
had no interest in pursuing the business further31
With John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos death then Catharine Furnacersquos future was in doubt
William Wellford Johnrsquos son became the de facto manager at the furnace although he
seemed to be a reluctant heir to this position William wrote to Edward Carmichael in early
1847 that lsquoI can by no means accept the execution of the Navy contractrsquo and that it
lsquoappears to be equally illegal for you and Mr C acting as surviving partners to undertake
itrsquo Because the Army and Navy contracted with individuals and not corporations John
Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal estate ndash not the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company ndash were the only ones authorised to complete any remaining
work Indeed the firmrsquos attorney had recently advised that William was only authorised to
continue Catharine Furnacersquos operations lsquofor the purpose of completing the execution of
any contracts which may have been entered into but not fully executed by his testator at
the time of his deathrsquo and that lsquoAt the death of Mr Wellford the partnership which existed
between himself amp others in the iron works ceased except for the purpose of completing
existing engagements and winding up the businessrsquo Only a few weeks later the trustee of
Francis Deanersquos share in the firm Richard H Cunningham announced that after several
meetings with William Wellford it was clear that he lsquohad no desire or intention of
purchasing the propertyrsquo and that the best course of action would be to liquidate the
physical assets of the corporation and ask $40000 for the lsquoEstate Fixtures and Mules (not
including any Pig Iron)rsquo By early April Fredericksburgrsquos Democratic Recorder
advertised the a June sale at auction of lsquoThe Catharine Furnace with Dwelling 4648 acres
of land containing iron ore well wooded fixtures patterns stock steam engine house
cupolas blacksmithrsquos tools ampc ampc with everything requisite for a complete iron
manufacturing establishmentrsquo32
Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
Was Catharine Furnace successful This is a difficult question to address without
understanding the early context in which the firm operated as well as its utter dependence
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1352 SP Adams
upon the personal capital of John Spotswood Wellford The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company struggled to find a reliable outlet for the products of Catharine
Furnace during its early history Local state and national trends created an unfavourable
atmosphere for starting an iron smelting operation during the late 1830s and early 1840s
John Wellford would have been well aware of his disadvantages in this regard As a longshy
time Fredericksburg resident with first-hand familiarity of the grandiose visions false
starts and frustrating stalls of local projects such as the Rappahannock Navigation
Company or the Fredericksburg and Potomac Creek Railroad Company Wellford
followed his entrepreneurial instincts into less traditional markets for ironmakers Rather
than wait for Fredericksburgrsquos prospects to magically reverse or dump his own financial
resources into a new improvement or manufacturing investment Wellford used his long
history of political and economic contacts to his firmrsquos advantage Military contracts
shifted the responsibility of success or failure into an entirely new area of risk ndash
Wellfordrsquos ability to maintain his contacts in the Navy and War departments and to spin
them into lucrative contracts for the production of shot and shell In the short term the
firmrsquos reliance upon government contracts saved Catharine Furnace and made the
operation profitable
In the long run though the dependency on John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal capital
bound the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company to its
owner and manager This was not the sort of social capital that could transfer easily to either
Johnrsquos family or his fellow incorporators In the end it was not Wellfordrsquos lack of
entrepreneurial talent that limited Catharine Furnacersquos long-term prospects but perhaps his
creative way of overcoming the various obstacles to profitable ironmaking that existed in
antebellum Virginia But just as traditional forms of financial capital need a strong
institutional environment to be effective so does social or personal capital need a
favourable context The Old Dominion for various reasons did not provide that favourable
context Wellfordrsquos case then offers an example of how his particular entrepreneurial
strategy offers up a short-term success story while at the same time exposing the difficult
context that industrial endeavours faced in the antebellum South
Local factors endemic to Fredericksburg for example played a large role in
amplifying the long-term weakness of relying upon personal rather than physical capital
for Catharine Furnace The most promising regional market Richmond essentially closed
up to Catharine Furnace pig iron by the early 1840s Once Francis Deane left the employ of
the Tredegar Company that firm failed to make massive purchases of Catharine Furnace
iron As the James River and Kanawha Canal linked the ironmakers of the Valley of
Virginia to Richmond moreover Catharine Furnace was further left out of the mix
Without the strong connections to market Wellfordrsquos successors most likely would have
continued to struggle to compete with other more integrated ironmakers In a larger sense
Fredericksburgrsquos entire manufacturing economy was being squeezed out of the picture
during the antebellum period as local boosters failed to make the necessary investments in
the regionrsquos physical infrastructure Geographer Keith Littlefield estimates that the city
lost control over 76 of the trade in its rural hinterland by 1860 as Richmond and
Alexandria expanded their commercial reach at Fredericksburgrsquos expense John
Wellfordrsquos own experience with failed turnpikes river improvements and railroads
during his pre-ironmaking days signalled a failure to secure a variety of market outlets for
Fredericksburgrsquos manufacturers Because Wellfordrsquos furnace produced pig iron ndash a high
bulk and low value commodity ndash shipping costs were a major factor in marketing its
products afar Since the cityrsquos commercial and manufacturing sector served a smaller and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
Business History 1343
which received corporate charters from the state in 1826 and 1828 Johnrsquos warehouse held
the lumber ready for the construction of locks he advertised for lsquo10 or fifteen able bodied
negro menrsquo to work on the project and at a groundbreaking ceremony offered a toast in
praise of the Virginia Board of Public Works lsquoThe fund of Internal Improvement ndash the
State helps those who help themselvesrsquo These ambitious plans again ran into trouble as
company officials deemed the Rappahannock navigation inadequate by 18369 In 1831
Wellford was unanimously elected secretary and treasurer of the Fredericksburg and
Potomac Company a firm that sought to build a turnpike then railroad linking the city to a
steamboat landing on Potomac Creek Although the founders predicted their system could
carry merchandise from Fredericksburg to Baltimore in 10 hours or less this plan also
failed to materialise A year later he helped secure a charter for the Fredericksburg and
Potomac Creek Railroad Company which apparently failed to attract enough stock
subscriptions Finally in 1835 John agreed to serve as a manager of the Rappahannock and
Blue Ridge Railroad yet another plan that failed to come to fruition10
All of these unfinished projects must have been frustrating for John Spotswood
Wellford Although he remained a prominent public figure in Fredericksburg an
upstanding member of the Presbyterian Church the anchor of a well-respected and
influential family and a successful banker and merchant his attempts to bring industrial
prosperity to his home town seemed mired in mediocrity So while he maintained a web of
contacts in these social economic and political circles this social capital was somewhat
limited in its efficacy In many ways he developed lsquopersonalrsquo rather than lsquosocialrsquo capital
as his various connections with fellow landholders Whigs and internal improvement
boosters did not translate into real change in the region even as they marked him
individually as one of the leading advocates of industrial development in the
Fredericksburg area This was reflected by Wellfordrsquos rather unconventional role as the
scion of a wealthy Virginia family he owned land but seemed more interested in
cultivating its iron ore than coaxing tobacco or wheat out of the ground Wellford owned
slaves but also belonged to an anti-slavery society He came from a well-connected and
affluent Fredericksburg family but sought to make connections with northern investors
and merchants throughout his career Like many entrepreneurs across history John
Spotswood Wellford demonstrated a willingness to break from the expected trajectory of
his life ndash he wanted to use his personal capital for material gain In 1836 he would get that
chance during the short-lived boom in the Virginia charcoal iron trade
The birth of Catharine Furnace
lsquoThe construction of the hearth is a business in which the founder takes an active partrsquo
Frederick Overman wrote in the 1854 version of his extensive guidebook The Manufacture
of Iron in All its Various Branches As the furnace superintendent drawing an annual salary
of $1000 John Spotswood Wellford undoubtedly involved himself in the early
construction and operation of the furnace First and foremost he gave the furnace its
distinctive name lsquoCatharinersquo after his mother Catharine Yates Wellford But perhaps
more importantly Wellford kept a careful account of the cost of labour and materials that
went into the making of Catharine Furnace This account book provides an invaluable
insight into the furnace operation Wellfordrsquos entries shown in Figure 1 were terse in the
fashion of most nineteenth-century business account books Nonetheless these entries
provide a narrative history of both the day-to-day and long-term goals of the enterprise
Even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company was a corporate
endeavour John Spotswood Wellford ran the business much like a proprietary owner
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1344 SP Adams
Figure 1 Typical page of John Wellfordrsquos Catharine Furnace Account Book Source Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC)
By the end of 1837 the construction tab had run to a little more than $7000 When coupled
with the cost of acquiring land for charcoaling and mining ore this put Catharine Furnace
well within the cost range of the average Virginia charcoal furnace but much beyond the
range of most individual proprietors11
Iron furnaces were usually lsquoblown inrsquo in the early spring so it was important that
Catharine Furnace be completed in the winter of 1837ndash38 By early January a set of hearth
stones had been delivered to the site for inside lining of the furnace the final brickwork on
the furnace was being completed and the furnacersquos lsquosuction enginersquo (most likely a steam
engine for operating the furnace bellows) had been repaired and was ready for use
A sizeable work force of at least 86 slaves was in place with 19 slaves allocated to work in
various ore mines in the area Although no official production figures are extant Wellfordrsquos
account book notes that by May of 1838 the first shipment of iron was hauled away from
the area The shipment of new hearth stones in late September signalled a successful first
blast as furnace linings often wore away as workers continually fed the blast12
Making the iron was only one facet of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Companyrsquos business how they could transport their goods to market was an entirely
different struggle Overland travel was the simplest and most common option but also the
most expensive Virginiarsquos charcoal iron operations needed to be located near ample
supplies of ore and timber which usually meant they were in sparsely populated areas
When Rockbridge Countyrsquos William Weaver sought to expand his iron manufacturing
business in 1826 he purposely located his new forge close to his blast furnace so as to
minimise the distance that the heavy iron pigs would travel in wagons or carts The Union
Forge in Patrick County paid $8 per ton to ship its iron only a short distance to market
In this regard Catharine Furnacersquos close proximity to Fredericksburg and its flat terrain
gave it an advantage over other Virginia charcoal iron furnaces the majority of which were
located in the mountainous counties in theValley ofVirginia The Swift RunGap Turnpike
commonly known as the Orange Turnpike served as Spotsylvania Countyrsquos major road
project The arearsquos distinctive red clay in the words of one historian was lsquosticky as fish glue
when wetrsquo and caked aroundwagon wheels Conditions on this road were so bad moreover
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1345
that in 1823 a lawsuit found the company negligent of regular repair and maintenance
Hauling iron in these conditions could be done over short distances only which ruled out
most overland routes for shipping iron from Spotsylvania County13
Whenever possible Virginia ironmakers shipped their products to market via natural
or improved waterways William Weaverrsquos placement of his new forge in 1826 sought to
reduce overland shipping costs but also put manufacturing iron within easy distance of the
North River where flat-bottomed boats could ship directly to major market centres When
the James River and Kanawha Canal reached the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains at
Lynchburg in 1840 the ironmakers of the Valley saw a dramatic reduction in
transportation costs to Richmond Even though John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos dream of easy
water navigation on the upper Rappahannock failed to materialise Fredericksburg still
served as an important link to the eastern seaboard via its tidewater port An 1835 guide to
Virginia referred to Fredericksburg as a lsquoprosperous portrsquo and noted that its wharves could
handle vessels up to 140 tons Local officials felt that they could have more support in
developing seaborne traffic from their state and federal governments In 1836 citizens
petitioned Congress to make Fredericksburg an official port of entry ndash ships had to pay
collection duties at Tappahannock 60 miles lower on the Rappahannock River ndash arguing
that this has caused lsquogreat trouble expense and inconveniencersquo to their merchants
Nonetheless iron could be shipped by water out of Fredericksburg at a fraction of the cost
of land transport and this would remain the major outlet for Wellfordrsquos iron business
throughout the antebellum period14
Fredericksburgrsquos connection to Virginiarsquos railway network was provided by the
Richmond Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad Company Chartered in 1834 this
railroad at first contained a rare and controversial clause that gave it the exclusive rights to
build a rail line between Richmond and Washington DC The Supreme Court struck down
this clause but the RFampP nonetheless served as the major north ndash south artery for eastern
Virginia by linking Fredericksburg to Richmond in 1837 The RFampP later built a branch to
Aquia Creek in 1842 which connected Fredericksburg to Washington DC via steamboat
Unfortunately many of these transportation projects were limited at the time Wellford
turned to iron manufacturing as the many failures in the regionrsquos internal improvements
kept Fredericksburg on the margins of Virginiarsquos budding industrial economy
One geographer notes that as Alexandria expanded from the north and Richmond
extended from the south by 1835 Fredericksburg lsquodid not reflect a tightly integrated
settlement system and this pervasive weakness highlighted the fragile underpinnings of the
local economyrsquo15
Despite the unsteady connections to market John Spotswood Wellford successfully
brought Catharine Furnace into producing iron in short order Unfortunately the price of
iron plunged right at the time that the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Company started selling it The economic downturn on the heels of the Panic of 1837
pushed iron prices to about half ndash $25 to $22 a ton ndash the level that they had been in the
previous year Luckily the company had a number of close ties with potential customers
$140080 worth of Catharine Furnace pig iron went to the Fredericksburg Union
Manufacturing Company in 1838 and another $111800 in the following year Undoubtedly
the presence of two Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company stockholders
William Crump and Edward Carmichael on the board of this local firm helped close that
sale Wellfordrsquos account book suggests that most of Catharine Furnacersquos initial production
made its way to the Tredegar Iron Company in Richmond where it would have most likely
been made into bar rails in Tredegarrsquos new rolling mill As Francis Deane served as both a
major stockholder in the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1346 SP Adams
the President of the Tredegar Iron Company the purchase of $2500 ndash or 55 of Catharine
Furnacersquos sales in 1838 ndash worth of pig iron benefited both firms16
John hoped to reach markets outside the Old Dominion in Catharine Furnacersquos initial
years of iron production His years spent working the dry goods trade in the North offered
some contacts his extensive family connections offered other potential forms of social
capital While his younger brother Charles Carter Wellford was in New York City on
business in 1838 John shipped a sample of Catharine Furnace iron for testing in that
market The iron must have answered relatively well as Wood Johnston amp Burritt a dry
goods firm in New York City with ties to Richmond Virginia purchased $22818 worth of
iron from Wellford that same year Three years later Wood Johnston and Burritt sold
another $116729 worth of Catharine Furnace iron shipped to them via the schooner
Andrew Browne The only other out-of-state customer in 1838 was CG Morris of
Charleston South Carolina who purchased $22818 worth of pig iron and sash weights
from Wellford17
The quest for new markets continued over the next few years with varying levels of
success In February of 1839 Wellford sold two tons of iron to a customer in the District of
Columbia No additional entries appear for this particular buyer so it seems that Catharine
Furnace iron did not take off in the Washington area That same year Wellford shipped six
tons of pig iron to Boston at $2751 per ton The New England market seemed a bit more
promising as Wellford received $291568 in sales from Charles Dyer of Providence
This was most likely pig iron for use by the Phoenix Iron Foundry Company a Providence
firm that manufactured various finished iron products such as gear wheels and specialised
machine tools In 1841 Wellford noted in his account book that lsquoiron was taken to
Portland to try the marketrsquo by Captain Freeman Smith and that Smith sold at least three
tons at $2632 per ton in Maine18
In its early years the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company exploited
Francis Deanersquos high position in Tredegar Iron Company thus making personal
connections between the incorporators essential to the firmrsquos early survival Deane had
been present in the creation of many Virginia ironworks and his personal connections in the
state trade were unparalleled In 1839 alone Tredegar purchased $16500 ndash probably over
500 tons worth ndash of iron from Catharine Furnace As an incorporator of the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company Deane had the opportunity to enrich both his
primary employer as well as his Fredericksburg investment by purchasing pig iron from
Catharine Furnace The following year however sales to Tredegar slowed to $3500 and no
more major transactions between the two companies occurred after 1840 This was in part
due to the financial problems suffered by the TredegarWorks and in particular the result of
Deanersquos inability to sell the firmrsquos products By 1841 the fortunes of the Tredegar Works
were in the words of Kathleen Bruce at a very lsquolow ebbrsquo and Deane was on his way out as
the companyrsquos chief executive the following year Tredegarrsquos ties with Fredericksburg
continued after Deanersquos departure Joseph Reid Anderson contacted John Spotswood
Wellford in the summer of 1841 to inquire about introducing Tredegar iron in
Fredericksburg Apparently the two had discussed the project in Washington DC and
Anderson offered Wellford work as an agent of the Tredegar Iron Works lsquoFrom the prices
paid as I understand and quantity of country iron shipped there from [Richmond]rsquo
Andersonwrote lsquoas well as the high character of the Tred Iron at present I am led to believe
that advantage to all concerned may accrue from its introduction into that marketrsquo Some
Catharine Furnace iron was sold out of Tredegarrsquos yard in Richmond as David J Burr amp
Co purchased seventeen tons in 1841 found that load wanting in quality and so asked
Wellford to replace the iron In the summer of 1845 a manager at Tredegar offered to
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1347
purchase 60 or 70 tons of lsquohigh and mottled Pig Ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace at the
relatively high rate of $28 per ton19
Making shot and shell for Washington
Following Deanersquos departure from Richmond the future of Catharine Furnace was even
more in the hands of John Spotswood Wellford In a sense he used this turn of events to
turn his individual connections ndash in this case much more lsquopersonalrsquo than lsquosocialrsquo capital ndash
to the benefit of his ironmaking business In 1841 Wellford increased his individual
ownership in the company to a little over 40 through the purchase of a controlling
amount of capital stock from one of the original incorporators His son William Wellford
also held Edward Carmichaelrsquos share in trust thus giving the Wellford family functional
command over the firm as they controlled 60 of the corporation The first three full years
of operation at Catharine Furnace had seen sales totals of $450191 in 1838 $18376 in
1839 and $677568 in 1840 ndash a total combined revenue of $2965359 Revenues thus
lagged well behind the accumulated operating costs of the furnace that had run to
$6874891 by 1840 Figure 2 shows this trend Clearly a new business strategy was
needed in order to make this endeavour work as Catharine Furnace had difficulties
breaking into various private markets In the summer of 1841 John Spotswood Wellford
Francis Deane and Edward Carmichael all travelled to Washington DC to seek ordnance
contracts from the United States War Department Like its earlier connections with
Tredegar the firmrsquos directors sought to turn their social capital into financial success 20
As it turns out contracting with the federal government suited Catharine Furnace quite
well so long as John Spotswood Wellford was in charge Ordnance contracts were
arranged between the War or Navy departments and individuals so the status and
reputation of an individual contractor weighed heavy on the process On 11 September
1841 Wellford signed a contract with the Navy to deliver 70000 rounds of 32 lb solid
shot at three cents a pound to Gosport Naval Yard in Norfolk Virginia The contract came
Figure 2 Estimates of operating costs and sales at Catharine Furnace 1837 ndash 46 Source Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1348 SP Adams
into force on 2 February 1842 with the final delivery of shot taking place by 31 January
1844 Pending inspection and satisfaction by the Navy Wellford would receive $67200
from the federal government In the spring of 1842 Catharine Furnace obtained shot
patterns from James Walker That summer at least five moulders William H Ferguson
William Pulham R Parker Nicholas Wharton and A Sutherland were hard at work
making 32 lb solid shot from Catharine Furnace iron and in June of 1842 Wellford sent
his first shipment of 5230 shot to Norfolk Naval records indicate that the ordnance officers
at Gosport received over 24000 shot by the end of 1842 Shipments tended to occur fairly
regularly and Catharine Furnace produced an impressive amount of ordnance in a
relatively short period of time as illustrated in Table 1 Assuming that each piece of 32 lb
solid shot actually weighed 32 pounds ndash an assumption that did not always hold true for
nineteenth-century naval ordnance ndash then the estimated value of Wellfordrsquos contract in
1842 alone was roughly $232089621
On the surface Catharine Furnacersquos success with military contracting put the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company on a strong trajectory With the
federal government providing a strong income stream Wellford might have parlayed his
success in ordnance into wider markets for his iron Historians of technology have
provided many examples in which antebellum military enterprise helped reorganise and
refine production techniques in northern government installations like the armouries at
Springfield Massachusetts and Philadelphia as well as with private contractors like
Connecticutrsquos Samuel Colt Virginiarsquos Harpers Ferry Armory exhibited a less than
exemplary record with regard to streamlining the production of muskets and small arms
But in the end even isolated Harpers Ferry entered the modern industrial age So at least
among northern industries military enterprise was in the words of Merritt Roe Smith a
lsquokey ingredient in the evolution of complex technological systemsrsquo and served as a critical
factor in that regionrsquos antebellum industrialisation22
Rather than diversify its production line or markets Catharine Furnacersquos manager
expanded further into the highly volatile ordnance trade Using his personal connections
with the Navy Wellford secured yet another contract for 70000 32 lb solid shot in
February of 1843 The terms of the contract were the same as the 1841 deal although this
time Wellford had less than a year to complete it Since he shipped only about a third of
this amount from Catharine Furnace in 1842 it is questionable whether or not Wellford
expected to produce all of the contracted shot at his own works It was not uncommon for
contractors even if they owned or operated an iron furnace themselves to sub-contract
Table 1 32 lb solid shot shipped to Gosport naval yard from Catharine Furnace 1842
Amount Received Estimated Value ($)
22 June 1842 5250 504000 22 June 1842 2623 251808 18 July 1842 3507 336672 4 August 1842 1692 162432 20 August 1842 2227 213792 8 September 1842 2102 201792 22 September 1842 1401 134496 3 October 1842 1874 179904 3 November 1842 3500 336000 Total 24176 2320896
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1349
production out to other firms at times In fact Wellford notes in his account book that 118
tons of pig iron shipped from the Fredericksburg wharf to Catharine Furnace in 1842 to be
melted into ball in his cupola furnaces Whether or not he had purchased this iron from
other furnaces or recalled it from pig iron meant for sale elsewhere is unclear But a year
later Wellford paid for 55 cartloads or 275 tons of pig iron from the Fredericksburg
wharf back to Catharine Furnace noting that this iron had been sent back from Boston
unsold lsquoon acct of its being so whitersquo and lsquowas therefore worked into ballrsquo23
Producing shot for the Navy secured a solid stream of income for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as a steady demand for iron for the
workers at Catharine Furnace These ordnance contracts required constant vigilance
however as Wellford visited Washington DC on numerous occasions to maintain his
personal connections with the War Department He also paid William Ridgely $8500 lsquofor
arranging accts and settling with [the] Naval Boardrsquo in 1842 Ridgely was a long-time
employee of the Navy who had been the Chief Clerk of the Naval Commissioners until
September of 1842 when he took a new position as Chief Clerk to the Bureau of Navy
Yards and Docks Sporadic payments to Ridgely ranging from $2000 to $10000
continued over the next few years but Wellfordrsquos entries do not give a full account of the
services rendered to him It is likely that Wellfordrsquos various contacts in Washington
provided him with valuable information When he learned that a Baltimore firm had failed
to supply 5000 cannon shot and that inspection officials had rejected 5000 additional units
Wellford wrote to Commodore WM Crane to see if he could provide any information
about securing a contract for himself to make up the 10000 in lost shot to the Navy24
Wellford also tried to squeeze larger profit margins out of the contract by rearranging
one of Catharine Furnacersquos great economic disadvantages ndash its high cost of transportation
The 1843 contract for example had an allowance of $2 per ton from Catharine Furnace to
Fredericksburg and another $1 per ton from Fredericksburg to Gosport In March of 1843
a naval official informed Wellford that lsquoafter reciting the price to be given for the shot
transportation to Fredericksburg and freight that no other allowance is to be madersquo for
shipping shot to Norfolk Whether or not the inspection of the ordnance occurred at
the furnace or at the naval yard was another factor in making contracts profitable Shot
and shell that was rejected at Catharine Furnace could be recast cheaply on the spot
rejected ordnance at Gosport needed to be shipped back to the furnace at the companyrsquos
expense Shipments to Gosport in the summer of 1843 were delayed by late arrival of an
inspection officer to Fredericksburg Some years later Wellford complained to the Navy
that their insistence upon inspections at the yard increased his already prohibitive
transportation costs25
Needless to say Wellford found ordnance a lucrative business for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company By 1843 Wellfordrsquos contracts with the War
Department were providing nearly all of Catharine Furnacersquos income This strategy
carried some risk as Wellford lost out on a contract to provide shot and shell for the Navy
in 1844 This contract went to the Tredegar Company now under the leadership of Joseph
Reid Anderson and making not only basic ordnance like shot and shell but also casting
cannon for the Federal government Like Catharine Furnace Tredegar drew upon strong
personal connections to Washington officials to secure these contracts Eastern Virginiarsquos
iron trade therefore relied almost completely on the federal statersquos demand for ordnance
This dependence proved tenuous when Wellfordrsquos relationship with the Navy soured in
1845 to the point that he was ordered to send back the governmentrsquos shot gauge gauge
plate and cylinders as well as any other instruments for shot inspection26
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1350 SP Adams
Wellford found making shot for the Navy to be a financially rewarding endeavour
even as it carried risks In a memorandum written into his account book he justified a
$344450 commission or 5 on his Navy contract in 1843 for lsquofurnishing the required
security and taking the contract in my name for better or for worsersquo lsquoThis contract I gave
the furnace of the advantage ofrsquo he continued lsquoand I do not hesitate to say that I could
have sold it for a profit of 10 per cent [] I would give that to day for a similar onersquo
Completing the Navyrsquos contract on 32 lb shot he argued in late 1844 kept him lsquo5 days in
the week absent from his familyrsquo and so he considered his personal charge of $122191 on
the yearrsquos receipts to be perfectly reasonable Wellford had reason to value his experience
with the Navy as he received $3226320 worth of contracts in the 1844 ndash45 fiscal year to
provide shot and shell for the Navyrsquos land-based fortifications These contracts accounted
for 272 of the Navyrsquos expenditure for this purpose and it made Wellford the single
largest naval ordnance contractor in the nation Losing this lucrative stream of income hurt
the future financial prospects of Catharine Furnace27
Rather than dwell on the failures with the Navy Wellford jumped into the manufacture
of 8 and 10 inch artillery shells and 12 and 24 lb solid shot for the US Army by signing a
$2442827 contract in 1844 He also upped his own commission to 10 arguing again
that he was remaining personally responsible for the contract lsquoThis contract I gave the
Furnace the advantage ofrsquo he argued in defence of his $241697 from the companyrsquos
account Rather than sub-contract out the work to other ironworks Wellford reminded his
partners that he planned to keep all of the Army business at Catharine Furnace He did not
lsquohesitate to say I could have sold it for a much larger advancersquo for his own personal profit
In the summer of 1844 Wellford rushed shell patterns from an armoury in Washington
and after receiving guidance from ordnance officer Colonel George Talcott was shipping
shot and shells to Fort Monroe For this job Wellford secured a favourable rate of 4 cents
for 10 inch shells 5 cents for 8 inch shells and 314 cents for 12 and 24 lb solid shot
Although the initial contract was for a little under $25000 Wellford continued to make
shot and shell for the Army well into 1846 by signing several small contracts in 1845 and a
large $1244469 order in 1846 Since Wellford upped his commission to 15 for that later
work he clearly felt that his personal stake in the army contracts merited a larger share of
the companyrsquos profits28
John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal fortunes with Catharine Furnace had finally
seemed to turn the corner By 1846 he had acquired a controlling interest in the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company by purchasing more shares in the
corporation bringing ownership stake to three-fifths Charles Dyer of Providence
moreover had recently concluded that lsquothis is as good if not the best market in the country
to dispose of all he has or may in future makersquo for Catharine Furnace pig iron Wellford
had 150 to 200 tons of pig iron on hand at the Fredericksburg wharf ready to ship out to the
Northeast Although the prospects of many Virginia charcoal iron furnaces seemed to be
on the decline in the face of Pennsylvaniarsquos anthracite ironmakers Wellfordrsquos connections
with the War Department and the suggestion of a niche market for Catharine Furnacersquos
lsquogray ironrsquo in Providence offered a glimpse of hope in late 184629
Following the outbreak of the War with Mexico Navy officials approached Wellford
about a new contract for shot and shell On 3 September 1846 the head of the Navyrsquos
Bureau of Ordnance Commodore Louis Warrington praised Wellfordrsquos past service and
in light of a shortage of shot and shell offered Wellford the opportunity to provide 10000
units of solid 32 lb shot and 7000 shells for 32 lb cannons for the Navy Wellford
responded in the positive as Commodore Warrington sent out a contract in October or
November of 1846 for his signature However Wellford never signed the contract and in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1351
late December of 1846 the residents of Fredericksburg were startled to discover that John
Spotswood Wellford the driving force behind so many social economic and political
movements in Spotsylvania County had died at the moment when Catharine Furnace
seemed on the brink of big success30
In the wake of Johnrsquos death the future direction of Catharine Furnace was in doubt
Edward Carmichael now living in Richmond attempted to assume control over Wellfordrsquos
Navy contract for 10000 32 lb shot and 7000 shells in early January 1847 As William
Wellford stalled in settling his fatherrsquos estate Carmichael argued that the Navy should
transfer the Catharine Furnace work to his authority Carmichael also undertook some
contracts to supply Army ordnance that he expected to be filled with Catharine Furnace
iron He immediately wrote to Fredericksburg asking for two or three pigs of lsquothe very best
Gray ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace to be sent to Richmond immediately so that he could
complete this contract at local forges In early February a lsquofearfulrsquo Carmichael advised
William to ship any remaining shot and shell on the Catharine Furnace grounds to Norfolk
by mid-March so as to fulfil any obligations he had to the Navy By late February William
had taken inventory of the remaining ordnance stock at Catharine Furnace and agreed to
ship the shot and shell on hand for the Army and to lsquomould the 24 lb Solid Shot and the 32
lb Sold Shot for the Navy with one workman on eachrsquo through mid-March The completion
of this final contract would be the last bit of ordnance manufacture done at Catharine
Furnace during the 1840s as William Wellford made clear in his correspondence that he
had no interest in pursuing the business further31
With John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos death then Catharine Furnacersquos future was in doubt
William Wellford Johnrsquos son became the de facto manager at the furnace although he
seemed to be a reluctant heir to this position William wrote to Edward Carmichael in early
1847 that lsquoI can by no means accept the execution of the Navy contractrsquo and that it
lsquoappears to be equally illegal for you and Mr C acting as surviving partners to undertake
itrsquo Because the Army and Navy contracted with individuals and not corporations John
Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal estate ndash not the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company ndash were the only ones authorised to complete any remaining
work Indeed the firmrsquos attorney had recently advised that William was only authorised to
continue Catharine Furnacersquos operations lsquofor the purpose of completing the execution of
any contracts which may have been entered into but not fully executed by his testator at
the time of his deathrsquo and that lsquoAt the death of Mr Wellford the partnership which existed
between himself amp others in the iron works ceased except for the purpose of completing
existing engagements and winding up the businessrsquo Only a few weeks later the trustee of
Francis Deanersquos share in the firm Richard H Cunningham announced that after several
meetings with William Wellford it was clear that he lsquohad no desire or intention of
purchasing the propertyrsquo and that the best course of action would be to liquidate the
physical assets of the corporation and ask $40000 for the lsquoEstate Fixtures and Mules (not
including any Pig Iron)rsquo By early April Fredericksburgrsquos Democratic Recorder
advertised the a June sale at auction of lsquoThe Catharine Furnace with Dwelling 4648 acres
of land containing iron ore well wooded fixtures patterns stock steam engine house
cupolas blacksmithrsquos tools ampc ampc with everything requisite for a complete iron
manufacturing establishmentrsquo32
Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
Was Catharine Furnace successful This is a difficult question to address without
understanding the early context in which the firm operated as well as its utter dependence
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1352 SP Adams
upon the personal capital of John Spotswood Wellford The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company struggled to find a reliable outlet for the products of Catharine
Furnace during its early history Local state and national trends created an unfavourable
atmosphere for starting an iron smelting operation during the late 1830s and early 1840s
John Wellford would have been well aware of his disadvantages in this regard As a longshy
time Fredericksburg resident with first-hand familiarity of the grandiose visions false
starts and frustrating stalls of local projects such as the Rappahannock Navigation
Company or the Fredericksburg and Potomac Creek Railroad Company Wellford
followed his entrepreneurial instincts into less traditional markets for ironmakers Rather
than wait for Fredericksburgrsquos prospects to magically reverse or dump his own financial
resources into a new improvement or manufacturing investment Wellford used his long
history of political and economic contacts to his firmrsquos advantage Military contracts
shifted the responsibility of success or failure into an entirely new area of risk ndash
Wellfordrsquos ability to maintain his contacts in the Navy and War departments and to spin
them into lucrative contracts for the production of shot and shell In the short term the
firmrsquos reliance upon government contracts saved Catharine Furnace and made the
operation profitable
In the long run though the dependency on John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal capital
bound the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company to its
owner and manager This was not the sort of social capital that could transfer easily to either
Johnrsquos family or his fellow incorporators In the end it was not Wellfordrsquos lack of
entrepreneurial talent that limited Catharine Furnacersquos long-term prospects but perhaps his
creative way of overcoming the various obstacles to profitable ironmaking that existed in
antebellum Virginia But just as traditional forms of financial capital need a strong
institutional environment to be effective so does social or personal capital need a
favourable context The Old Dominion for various reasons did not provide that favourable
context Wellfordrsquos case then offers an example of how his particular entrepreneurial
strategy offers up a short-term success story while at the same time exposing the difficult
context that industrial endeavours faced in the antebellum South
Local factors endemic to Fredericksburg for example played a large role in
amplifying the long-term weakness of relying upon personal rather than physical capital
for Catharine Furnace The most promising regional market Richmond essentially closed
up to Catharine Furnace pig iron by the early 1840s Once Francis Deane left the employ of
the Tredegar Company that firm failed to make massive purchases of Catharine Furnace
iron As the James River and Kanawha Canal linked the ironmakers of the Valley of
Virginia to Richmond moreover Catharine Furnace was further left out of the mix
Without the strong connections to market Wellfordrsquos successors most likely would have
continued to struggle to compete with other more integrated ironmakers In a larger sense
Fredericksburgrsquos entire manufacturing economy was being squeezed out of the picture
during the antebellum period as local boosters failed to make the necessary investments in
the regionrsquos physical infrastructure Geographer Keith Littlefield estimates that the city
lost control over 76 of the trade in its rural hinterland by 1860 as Richmond and
Alexandria expanded their commercial reach at Fredericksburgrsquos expense John
Wellfordrsquos own experience with failed turnpikes river improvements and railroads
during his pre-ironmaking days signalled a failure to secure a variety of market outlets for
Fredericksburgrsquos manufacturers Because Wellfordrsquos furnace produced pig iron ndash a high
bulk and low value commodity ndash shipping costs were a major factor in marketing its
products afar Since the cityrsquos commercial and manufacturing sector served a smaller and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
1344 SP Adams
Figure 1 Typical page of John Wellfordrsquos Catharine Furnace Account Book Source Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC)
By the end of 1837 the construction tab had run to a little more than $7000 When coupled
with the cost of acquiring land for charcoaling and mining ore this put Catharine Furnace
well within the cost range of the average Virginia charcoal furnace but much beyond the
range of most individual proprietors11
Iron furnaces were usually lsquoblown inrsquo in the early spring so it was important that
Catharine Furnace be completed in the winter of 1837ndash38 By early January a set of hearth
stones had been delivered to the site for inside lining of the furnace the final brickwork on
the furnace was being completed and the furnacersquos lsquosuction enginersquo (most likely a steam
engine for operating the furnace bellows) had been repaired and was ready for use
A sizeable work force of at least 86 slaves was in place with 19 slaves allocated to work in
various ore mines in the area Although no official production figures are extant Wellfordrsquos
account book notes that by May of 1838 the first shipment of iron was hauled away from
the area The shipment of new hearth stones in late September signalled a successful first
blast as furnace linings often wore away as workers continually fed the blast12
Making the iron was only one facet of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Companyrsquos business how they could transport their goods to market was an entirely
different struggle Overland travel was the simplest and most common option but also the
most expensive Virginiarsquos charcoal iron operations needed to be located near ample
supplies of ore and timber which usually meant they were in sparsely populated areas
When Rockbridge Countyrsquos William Weaver sought to expand his iron manufacturing
business in 1826 he purposely located his new forge close to his blast furnace so as to
minimise the distance that the heavy iron pigs would travel in wagons or carts The Union
Forge in Patrick County paid $8 per ton to ship its iron only a short distance to market
In this regard Catharine Furnacersquos close proximity to Fredericksburg and its flat terrain
gave it an advantage over other Virginia charcoal iron furnaces the majority of which were
located in the mountainous counties in theValley ofVirginia The Swift RunGap Turnpike
commonly known as the Orange Turnpike served as Spotsylvania Countyrsquos major road
project The arearsquos distinctive red clay in the words of one historian was lsquosticky as fish glue
when wetrsquo and caked aroundwagon wheels Conditions on this road were so bad moreover
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1345
that in 1823 a lawsuit found the company negligent of regular repair and maintenance
Hauling iron in these conditions could be done over short distances only which ruled out
most overland routes for shipping iron from Spotsylvania County13
Whenever possible Virginia ironmakers shipped their products to market via natural
or improved waterways William Weaverrsquos placement of his new forge in 1826 sought to
reduce overland shipping costs but also put manufacturing iron within easy distance of the
North River where flat-bottomed boats could ship directly to major market centres When
the James River and Kanawha Canal reached the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains at
Lynchburg in 1840 the ironmakers of the Valley saw a dramatic reduction in
transportation costs to Richmond Even though John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos dream of easy
water navigation on the upper Rappahannock failed to materialise Fredericksburg still
served as an important link to the eastern seaboard via its tidewater port An 1835 guide to
Virginia referred to Fredericksburg as a lsquoprosperous portrsquo and noted that its wharves could
handle vessels up to 140 tons Local officials felt that they could have more support in
developing seaborne traffic from their state and federal governments In 1836 citizens
petitioned Congress to make Fredericksburg an official port of entry ndash ships had to pay
collection duties at Tappahannock 60 miles lower on the Rappahannock River ndash arguing
that this has caused lsquogreat trouble expense and inconveniencersquo to their merchants
Nonetheless iron could be shipped by water out of Fredericksburg at a fraction of the cost
of land transport and this would remain the major outlet for Wellfordrsquos iron business
throughout the antebellum period14
Fredericksburgrsquos connection to Virginiarsquos railway network was provided by the
Richmond Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad Company Chartered in 1834 this
railroad at first contained a rare and controversial clause that gave it the exclusive rights to
build a rail line between Richmond and Washington DC The Supreme Court struck down
this clause but the RFampP nonetheless served as the major north ndash south artery for eastern
Virginia by linking Fredericksburg to Richmond in 1837 The RFampP later built a branch to
Aquia Creek in 1842 which connected Fredericksburg to Washington DC via steamboat
Unfortunately many of these transportation projects were limited at the time Wellford
turned to iron manufacturing as the many failures in the regionrsquos internal improvements
kept Fredericksburg on the margins of Virginiarsquos budding industrial economy
One geographer notes that as Alexandria expanded from the north and Richmond
extended from the south by 1835 Fredericksburg lsquodid not reflect a tightly integrated
settlement system and this pervasive weakness highlighted the fragile underpinnings of the
local economyrsquo15
Despite the unsteady connections to market John Spotswood Wellford successfully
brought Catharine Furnace into producing iron in short order Unfortunately the price of
iron plunged right at the time that the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Company started selling it The economic downturn on the heels of the Panic of 1837
pushed iron prices to about half ndash $25 to $22 a ton ndash the level that they had been in the
previous year Luckily the company had a number of close ties with potential customers
$140080 worth of Catharine Furnace pig iron went to the Fredericksburg Union
Manufacturing Company in 1838 and another $111800 in the following year Undoubtedly
the presence of two Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company stockholders
William Crump and Edward Carmichael on the board of this local firm helped close that
sale Wellfordrsquos account book suggests that most of Catharine Furnacersquos initial production
made its way to the Tredegar Iron Company in Richmond where it would have most likely
been made into bar rails in Tredegarrsquos new rolling mill As Francis Deane served as both a
major stockholder in the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1346 SP Adams
the President of the Tredegar Iron Company the purchase of $2500 ndash or 55 of Catharine
Furnacersquos sales in 1838 ndash worth of pig iron benefited both firms16
John hoped to reach markets outside the Old Dominion in Catharine Furnacersquos initial
years of iron production His years spent working the dry goods trade in the North offered
some contacts his extensive family connections offered other potential forms of social
capital While his younger brother Charles Carter Wellford was in New York City on
business in 1838 John shipped a sample of Catharine Furnace iron for testing in that
market The iron must have answered relatively well as Wood Johnston amp Burritt a dry
goods firm in New York City with ties to Richmond Virginia purchased $22818 worth of
iron from Wellford that same year Three years later Wood Johnston and Burritt sold
another $116729 worth of Catharine Furnace iron shipped to them via the schooner
Andrew Browne The only other out-of-state customer in 1838 was CG Morris of
Charleston South Carolina who purchased $22818 worth of pig iron and sash weights
from Wellford17
The quest for new markets continued over the next few years with varying levels of
success In February of 1839 Wellford sold two tons of iron to a customer in the District of
Columbia No additional entries appear for this particular buyer so it seems that Catharine
Furnace iron did not take off in the Washington area That same year Wellford shipped six
tons of pig iron to Boston at $2751 per ton The New England market seemed a bit more
promising as Wellford received $291568 in sales from Charles Dyer of Providence
This was most likely pig iron for use by the Phoenix Iron Foundry Company a Providence
firm that manufactured various finished iron products such as gear wheels and specialised
machine tools In 1841 Wellford noted in his account book that lsquoiron was taken to
Portland to try the marketrsquo by Captain Freeman Smith and that Smith sold at least three
tons at $2632 per ton in Maine18
In its early years the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company exploited
Francis Deanersquos high position in Tredegar Iron Company thus making personal
connections between the incorporators essential to the firmrsquos early survival Deane had
been present in the creation of many Virginia ironworks and his personal connections in the
state trade were unparalleled In 1839 alone Tredegar purchased $16500 ndash probably over
500 tons worth ndash of iron from Catharine Furnace As an incorporator of the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company Deane had the opportunity to enrich both his
primary employer as well as his Fredericksburg investment by purchasing pig iron from
Catharine Furnace The following year however sales to Tredegar slowed to $3500 and no
more major transactions between the two companies occurred after 1840 This was in part
due to the financial problems suffered by the TredegarWorks and in particular the result of
Deanersquos inability to sell the firmrsquos products By 1841 the fortunes of the Tredegar Works
were in the words of Kathleen Bruce at a very lsquolow ebbrsquo and Deane was on his way out as
the companyrsquos chief executive the following year Tredegarrsquos ties with Fredericksburg
continued after Deanersquos departure Joseph Reid Anderson contacted John Spotswood
Wellford in the summer of 1841 to inquire about introducing Tredegar iron in
Fredericksburg Apparently the two had discussed the project in Washington DC and
Anderson offered Wellford work as an agent of the Tredegar Iron Works lsquoFrom the prices
paid as I understand and quantity of country iron shipped there from [Richmond]rsquo
Andersonwrote lsquoas well as the high character of the Tred Iron at present I am led to believe
that advantage to all concerned may accrue from its introduction into that marketrsquo Some
Catharine Furnace iron was sold out of Tredegarrsquos yard in Richmond as David J Burr amp
Co purchased seventeen tons in 1841 found that load wanting in quality and so asked
Wellford to replace the iron In the summer of 1845 a manager at Tredegar offered to
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1347
purchase 60 or 70 tons of lsquohigh and mottled Pig Ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace at the
relatively high rate of $28 per ton19
Making shot and shell for Washington
Following Deanersquos departure from Richmond the future of Catharine Furnace was even
more in the hands of John Spotswood Wellford In a sense he used this turn of events to
turn his individual connections ndash in this case much more lsquopersonalrsquo than lsquosocialrsquo capital ndash
to the benefit of his ironmaking business In 1841 Wellford increased his individual
ownership in the company to a little over 40 through the purchase of a controlling
amount of capital stock from one of the original incorporators His son William Wellford
also held Edward Carmichaelrsquos share in trust thus giving the Wellford family functional
command over the firm as they controlled 60 of the corporation The first three full years
of operation at Catharine Furnace had seen sales totals of $450191 in 1838 $18376 in
1839 and $677568 in 1840 ndash a total combined revenue of $2965359 Revenues thus
lagged well behind the accumulated operating costs of the furnace that had run to
$6874891 by 1840 Figure 2 shows this trend Clearly a new business strategy was
needed in order to make this endeavour work as Catharine Furnace had difficulties
breaking into various private markets In the summer of 1841 John Spotswood Wellford
Francis Deane and Edward Carmichael all travelled to Washington DC to seek ordnance
contracts from the United States War Department Like its earlier connections with
Tredegar the firmrsquos directors sought to turn their social capital into financial success 20
As it turns out contracting with the federal government suited Catharine Furnace quite
well so long as John Spotswood Wellford was in charge Ordnance contracts were
arranged between the War or Navy departments and individuals so the status and
reputation of an individual contractor weighed heavy on the process On 11 September
1841 Wellford signed a contract with the Navy to deliver 70000 rounds of 32 lb solid
shot at three cents a pound to Gosport Naval Yard in Norfolk Virginia The contract came
Figure 2 Estimates of operating costs and sales at Catharine Furnace 1837 ndash 46 Source Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1348 SP Adams
into force on 2 February 1842 with the final delivery of shot taking place by 31 January
1844 Pending inspection and satisfaction by the Navy Wellford would receive $67200
from the federal government In the spring of 1842 Catharine Furnace obtained shot
patterns from James Walker That summer at least five moulders William H Ferguson
William Pulham R Parker Nicholas Wharton and A Sutherland were hard at work
making 32 lb solid shot from Catharine Furnace iron and in June of 1842 Wellford sent
his first shipment of 5230 shot to Norfolk Naval records indicate that the ordnance officers
at Gosport received over 24000 shot by the end of 1842 Shipments tended to occur fairly
regularly and Catharine Furnace produced an impressive amount of ordnance in a
relatively short period of time as illustrated in Table 1 Assuming that each piece of 32 lb
solid shot actually weighed 32 pounds ndash an assumption that did not always hold true for
nineteenth-century naval ordnance ndash then the estimated value of Wellfordrsquos contract in
1842 alone was roughly $232089621
On the surface Catharine Furnacersquos success with military contracting put the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company on a strong trajectory With the
federal government providing a strong income stream Wellford might have parlayed his
success in ordnance into wider markets for his iron Historians of technology have
provided many examples in which antebellum military enterprise helped reorganise and
refine production techniques in northern government installations like the armouries at
Springfield Massachusetts and Philadelphia as well as with private contractors like
Connecticutrsquos Samuel Colt Virginiarsquos Harpers Ferry Armory exhibited a less than
exemplary record with regard to streamlining the production of muskets and small arms
But in the end even isolated Harpers Ferry entered the modern industrial age So at least
among northern industries military enterprise was in the words of Merritt Roe Smith a
lsquokey ingredient in the evolution of complex technological systemsrsquo and served as a critical
factor in that regionrsquos antebellum industrialisation22
Rather than diversify its production line or markets Catharine Furnacersquos manager
expanded further into the highly volatile ordnance trade Using his personal connections
with the Navy Wellford secured yet another contract for 70000 32 lb solid shot in
February of 1843 The terms of the contract were the same as the 1841 deal although this
time Wellford had less than a year to complete it Since he shipped only about a third of
this amount from Catharine Furnace in 1842 it is questionable whether or not Wellford
expected to produce all of the contracted shot at his own works It was not uncommon for
contractors even if they owned or operated an iron furnace themselves to sub-contract
Table 1 32 lb solid shot shipped to Gosport naval yard from Catharine Furnace 1842
Amount Received Estimated Value ($)
22 June 1842 5250 504000 22 June 1842 2623 251808 18 July 1842 3507 336672 4 August 1842 1692 162432 20 August 1842 2227 213792 8 September 1842 2102 201792 22 September 1842 1401 134496 3 October 1842 1874 179904 3 November 1842 3500 336000 Total 24176 2320896
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1349
production out to other firms at times In fact Wellford notes in his account book that 118
tons of pig iron shipped from the Fredericksburg wharf to Catharine Furnace in 1842 to be
melted into ball in his cupola furnaces Whether or not he had purchased this iron from
other furnaces or recalled it from pig iron meant for sale elsewhere is unclear But a year
later Wellford paid for 55 cartloads or 275 tons of pig iron from the Fredericksburg
wharf back to Catharine Furnace noting that this iron had been sent back from Boston
unsold lsquoon acct of its being so whitersquo and lsquowas therefore worked into ballrsquo23
Producing shot for the Navy secured a solid stream of income for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as a steady demand for iron for the
workers at Catharine Furnace These ordnance contracts required constant vigilance
however as Wellford visited Washington DC on numerous occasions to maintain his
personal connections with the War Department He also paid William Ridgely $8500 lsquofor
arranging accts and settling with [the] Naval Boardrsquo in 1842 Ridgely was a long-time
employee of the Navy who had been the Chief Clerk of the Naval Commissioners until
September of 1842 when he took a new position as Chief Clerk to the Bureau of Navy
Yards and Docks Sporadic payments to Ridgely ranging from $2000 to $10000
continued over the next few years but Wellfordrsquos entries do not give a full account of the
services rendered to him It is likely that Wellfordrsquos various contacts in Washington
provided him with valuable information When he learned that a Baltimore firm had failed
to supply 5000 cannon shot and that inspection officials had rejected 5000 additional units
Wellford wrote to Commodore WM Crane to see if he could provide any information
about securing a contract for himself to make up the 10000 in lost shot to the Navy24
Wellford also tried to squeeze larger profit margins out of the contract by rearranging
one of Catharine Furnacersquos great economic disadvantages ndash its high cost of transportation
The 1843 contract for example had an allowance of $2 per ton from Catharine Furnace to
Fredericksburg and another $1 per ton from Fredericksburg to Gosport In March of 1843
a naval official informed Wellford that lsquoafter reciting the price to be given for the shot
transportation to Fredericksburg and freight that no other allowance is to be madersquo for
shipping shot to Norfolk Whether or not the inspection of the ordnance occurred at
the furnace or at the naval yard was another factor in making contracts profitable Shot
and shell that was rejected at Catharine Furnace could be recast cheaply on the spot
rejected ordnance at Gosport needed to be shipped back to the furnace at the companyrsquos
expense Shipments to Gosport in the summer of 1843 were delayed by late arrival of an
inspection officer to Fredericksburg Some years later Wellford complained to the Navy
that their insistence upon inspections at the yard increased his already prohibitive
transportation costs25
Needless to say Wellford found ordnance a lucrative business for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company By 1843 Wellfordrsquos contracts with the War
Department were providing nearly all of Catharine Furnacersquos income This strategy
carried some risk as Wellford lost out on a contract to provide shot and shell for the Navy
in 1844 This contract went to the Tredegar Company now under the leadership of Joseph
Reid Anderson and making not only basic ordnance like shot and shell but also casting
cannon for the Federal government Like Catharine Furnace Tredegar drew upon strong
personal connections to Washington officials to secure these contracts Eastern Virginiarsquos
iron trade therefore relied almost completely on the federal statersquos demand for ordnance
This dependence proved tenuous when Wellfordrsquos relationship with the Navy soured in
1845 to the point that he was ordered to send back the governmentrsquos shot gauge gauge
plate and cylinders as well as any other instruments for shot inspection26
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1350 SP Adams
Wellford found making shot for the Navy to be a financially rewarding endeavour
even as it carried risks In a memorandum written into his account book he justified a
$344450 commission or 5 on his Navy contract in 1843 for lsquofurnishing the required
security and taking the contract in my name for better or for worsersquo lsquoThis contract I gave
the furnace of the advantage ofrsquo he continued lsquoand I do not hesitate to say that I could
have sold it for a profit of 10 per cent [] I would give that to day for a similar onersquo
Completing the Navyrsquos contract on 32 lb shot he argued in late 1844 kept him lsquo5 days in
the week absent from his familyrsquo and so he considered his personal charge of $122191 on
the yearrsquos receipts to be perfectly reasonable Wellford had reason to value his experience
with the Navy as he received $3226320 worth of contracts in the 1844 ndash45 fiscal year to
provide shot and shell for the Navyrsquos land-based fortifications These contracts accounted
for 272 of the Navyrsquos expenditure for this purpose and it made Wellford the single
largest naval ordnance contractor in the nation Losing this lucrative stream of income hurt
the future financial prospects of Catharine Furnace27
Rather than dwell on the failures with the Navy Wellford jumped into the manufacture
of 8 and 10 inch artillery shells and 12 and 24 lb solid shot for the US Army by signing a
$2442827 contract in 1844 He also upped his own commission to 10 arguing again
that he was remaining personally responsible for the contract lsquoThis contract I gave the
Furnace the advantage ofrsquo he argued in defence of his $241697 from the companyrsquos
account Rather than sub-contract out the work to other ironworks Wellford reminded his
partners that he planned to keep all of the Army business at Catharine Furnace He did not
lsquohesitate to say I could have sold it for a much larger advancersquo for his own personal profit
In the summer of 1844 Wellford rushed shell patterns from an armoury in Washington
and after receiving guidance from ordnance officer Colonel George Talcott was shipping
shot and shells to Fort Monroe For this job Wellford secured a favourable rate of 4 cents
for 10 inch shells 5 cents for 8 inch shells and 314 cents for 12 and 24 lb solid shot
Although the initial contract was for a little under $25000 Wellford continued to make
shot and shell for the Army well into 1846 by signing several small contracts in 1845 and a
large $1244469 order in 1846 Since Wellford upped his commission to 15 for that later
work he clearly felt that his personal stake in the army contracts merited a larger share of
the companyrsquos profits28
John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal fortunes with Catharine Furnace had finally
seemed to turn the corner By 1846 he had acquired a controlling interest in the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company by purchasing more shares in the
corporation bringing ownership stake to three-fifths Charles Dyer of Providence
moreover had recently concluded that lsquothis is as good if not the best market in the country
to dispose of all he has or may in future makersquo for Catharine Furnace pig iron Wellford
had 150 to 200 tons of pig iron on hand at the Fredericksburg wharf ready to ship out to the
Northeast Although the prospects of many Virginia charcoal iron furnaces seemed to be
on the decline in the face of Pennsylvaniarsquos anthracite ironmakers Wellfordrsquos connections
with the War Department and the suggestion of a niche market for Catharine Furnacersquos
lsquogray ironrsquo in Providence offered a glimpse of hope in late 184629
Following the outbreak of the War with Mexico Navy officials approached Wellford
about a new contract for shot and shell On 3 September 1846 the head of the Navyrsquos
Bureau of Ordnance Commodore Louis Warrington praised Wellfordrsquos past service and
in light of a shortage of shot and shell offered Wellford the opportunity to provide 10000
units of solid 32 lb shot and 7000 shells for 32 lb cannons for the Navy Wellford
responded in the positive as Commodore Warrington sent out a contract in October or
November of 1846 for his signature However Wellford never signed the contract and in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1351
late December of 1846 the residents of Fredericksburg were startled to discover that John
Spotswood Wellford the driving force behind so many social economic and political
movements in Spotsylvania County had died at the moment when Catharine Furnace
seemed on the brink of big success30
In the wake of Johnrsquos death the future direction of Catharine Furnace was in doubt
Edward Carmichael now living in Richmond attempted to assume control over Wellfordrsquos
Navy contract for 10000 32 lb shot and 7000 shells in early January 1847 As William
Wellford stalled in settling his fatherrsquos estate Carmichael argued that the Navy should
transfer the Catharine Furnace work to his authority Carmichael also undertook some
contracts to supply Army ordnance that he expected to be filled with Catharine Furnace
iron He immediately wrote to Fredericksburg asking for two or three pigs of lsquothe very best
Gray ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace to be sent to Richmond immediately so that he could
complete this contract at local forges In early February a lsquofearfulrsquo Carmichael advised
William to ship any remaining shot and shell on the Catharine Furnace grounds to Norfolk
by mid-March so as to fulfil any obligations he had to the Navy By late February William
had taken inventory of the remaining ordnance stock at Catharine Furnace and agreed to
ship the shot and shell on hand for the Army and to lsquomould the 24 lb Solid Shot and the 32
lb Sold Shot for the Navy with one workman on eachrsquo through mid-March The completion
of this final contract would be the last bit of ordnance manufacture done at Catharine
Furnace during the 1840s as William Wellford made clear in his correspondence that he
had no interest in pursuing the business further31
With John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos death then Catharine Furnacersquos future was in doubt
William Wellford Johnrsquos son became the de facto manager at the furnace although he
seemed to be a reluctant heir to this position William wrote to Edward Carmichael in early
1847 that lsquoI can by no means accept the execution of the Navy contractrsquo and that it
lsquoappears to be equally illegal for you and Mr C acting as surviving partners to undertake
itrsquo Because the Army and Navy contracted with individuals and not corporations John
Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal estate ndash not the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company ndash were the only ones authorised to complete any remaining
work Indeed the firmrsquos attorney had recently advised that William was only authorised to
continue Catharine Furnacersquos operations lsquofor the purpose of completing the execution of
any contracts which may have been entered into but not fully executed by his testator at
the time of his deathrsquo and that lsquoAt the death of Mr Wellford the partnership which existed
between himself amp others in the iron works ceased except for the purpose of completing
existing engagements and winding up the businessrsquo Only a few weeks later the trustee of
Francis Deanersquos share in the firm Richard H Cunningham announced that after several
meetings with William Wellford it was clear that he lsquohad no desire or intention of
purchasing the propertyrsquo and that the best course of action would be to liquidate the
physical assets of the corporation and ask $40000 for the lsquoEstate Fixtures and Mules (not
including any Pig Iron)rsquo By early April Fredericksburgrsquos Democratic Recorder
advertised the a June sale at auction of lsquoThe Catharine Furnace with Dwelling 4648 acres
of land containing iron ore well wooded fixtures patterns stock steam engine house
cupolas blacksmithrsquos tools ampc ampc with everything requisite for a complete iron
manufacturing establishmentrsquo32
Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
Was Catharine Furnace successful This is a difficult question to address without
understanding the early context in which the firm operated as well as its utter dependence
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1352 SP Adams
upon the personal capital of John Spotswood Wellford The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company struggled to find a reliable outlet for the products of Catharine
Furnace during its early history Local state and national trends created an unfavourable
atmosphere for starting an iron smelting operation during the late 1830s and early 1840s
John Wellford would have been well aware of his disadvantages in this regard As a longshy
time Fredericksburg resident with first-hand familiarity of the grandiose visions false
starts and frustrating stalls of local projects such as the Rappahannock Navigation
Company or the Fredericksburg and Potomac Creek Railroad Company Wellford
followed his entrepreneurial instincts into less traditional markets for ironmakers Rather
than wait for Fredericksburgrsquos prospects to magically reverse or dump his own financial
resources into a new improvement or manufacturing investment Wellford used his long
history of political and economic contacts to his firmrsquos advantage Military contracts
shifted the responsibility of success or failure into an entirely new area of risk ndash
Wellfordrsquos ability to maintain his contacts in the Navy and War departments and to spin
them into lucrative contracts for the production of shot and shell In the short term the
firmrsquos reliance upon government contracts saved Catharine Furnace and made the
operation profitable
In the long run though the dependency on John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal capital
bound the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company to its
owner and manager This was not the sort of social capital that could transfer easily to either
Johnrsquos family or his fellow incorporators In the end it was not Wellfordrsquos lack of
entrepreneurial talent that limited Catharine Furnacersquos long-term prospects but perhaps his
creative way of overcoming the various obstacles to profitable ironmaking that existed in
antebellum Virginia But just as traditional forms of financial capital need a strong
institutional environment to be effective so does social or personal capital need a
favourable context The Old Dominion for various reasons did not provide that favourable
context Wellfordrsquos case then offers an example of how his particular entrepreneurial
strategy offers up a short-term success story while at the same time exposing the difficult
context that industrial endeavours faced in the antebellum South
Local factors endemic to Fredericksburg for example played a large role in
amplifying the long-term weakness of relying upon personal rather than physical capital
for Catharine Furnace The most promising regional market Richmond essentially closed
up to Catharine Furnace pig iron by the early 1840s Once Francis Deane left the employ of
the Tredegar Company that firm failed to make massive purchases of Catharine Furnace
iron As the James River and Kanawha Canal linked the ironmakers of the Valley of
Virginia to Richmond moreover Catharine Furnace was further left out of the mix
Without the strong connections to market Wellfordrsquos successors most likely would have
continued to struggle to compete with other more integrated ironmakers In a larger sense
Fredericksburgrsquos entire manufacturing economy was being squeezed out of the picture
during the antebellum period as local boosters failed to make the necessary investments in
the regionrsquos physical infrastructure Geographer Keith Littlefield estimates that the city
lost control over 76 of the trade in its rural hinterland by 1860 as Richmond and
Alexandria expanded their commercial reach at Fredericksburgrsquos expense John
Wellfordrsquos own experience with failed turnpikes river improvements and railroads
during his pre-ironmaking days signalled a failure to secure a variety of market outlets for
Fredericksburgrsquos manufacturers Because Wellfordrsquos furnace produced pig iron ndash a high
bulk and low value commodity ndash shipping costs were a major factor in marketing its
products afar Since the cityrsquos commercial and manufacturing sector served a smaller and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
Business History 1345
that in 1823 a lawsuit found the company negligent of regular repair and maintenance
Hauling iron in these conditions could be done over short distances only which ruled out
most overland routes for shipping iron from Spotsylvania County13
Whenever possible Virginia ironmakers shipped their products to market via natural
or improved waterways William Weaverrsquos placement of his new forge in 1826 sought to
reduce overland shipping costs but also put manufacturing iron within easy distance of the
North River where flat-bottomed boats could ship directly to major market centres When
the James River and Kanawha Canal reached the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains at
Lynchburg in 1840 the ironmakers of the Valley saw a dramatic reduction in
transportation costs to Richmond Even though John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos dream of easy
water navigation on the upper Rappahannock failed to materialise Fredericksburg still
served as an important link to the eastern seaboard via its tidewater port An 1835 guide to
Virginia referred to Fredericksburg as a lsquoprosperous portrsquo and noted that its wharves could
handle vessels up to 140 tons Local officials felt that they could have more support in
developing seaborne traffic from their state and federal governments In 1836 citizens
petitioned Congress to make Fredericksburg an official port of entry ndash ships had to pay
collection duties at Tappahannock 60 miles lower on the Rappahannock River ndash arguing
that this has caused lsquogreat trouble expense and inconveniencersquo to their merchants
Nonetheless iron could be shipped by water out of Fredericksburg at a fraction of the cost
of land transport and this would remain the major outlet for Wellfordrsquos iron business
throughout the antebellum period14
Fredericksburgrsquos connection to Virginiarsquos railway network was provided by the
Richmond Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad Company Chartered in 1834 this
railroad at first contained a rare and controversial clause that gave it the exclusive rights to
build a rail line between Richmond and Washington DC The Supreme Court struck down
this clause but the RFampP nonetheless served as the major north ndash south artery for eastern
Virginia by linking Fredericksburg to Richmond in 1837 The RFampP later built a branch to
Aquia Creek in 1842 which connected Fredericksburg to Washington DC via steamboat
Unfortunately many of these transportation projects were limited at the time Wellford
turned to iron manufacturing as the many failures in the regionrsquos internal improvements
kept Fredericksburg on the margins of Virginiarsquos budding industrial economy
One geographer notes that as Alexandria expanded from the north and Richmond
extended from the south by 1835 Fredericksburg lsquodid not reflect a tightly integrated
settlement system and this pervasive weakness highlighted the fragile underpinnings of the
local economyrsquo15
Despite the unsteady connections to market John Spotswood Wellford successfully
brought Catharine Furnace into producing iron in short order Unfortunately the price of
iron plunged right at the time that the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Company started selling it The economic downturn on the heels of the Panic of 1837
pushed iron prices to about half ndash $25 to $22 a ton ndash the level that they had been in the
previous year Luckily the company had a number of close ties with potential customers
$140080 worth of Catharine Furnace pig iron went to the Fredericksburg Union
Manufacturing Company in 1838 and another $111800 in the following year Undoubtedly
the presence of two Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company stockholders
William Crump and Edward Carmichael on the board of this local firm helped close that
sale Wellfordrsquos account book suggests that most of Catharine Furnacersquos initial production
made its way to the Tredegar Iron Company in Richmond where it would have most likely
been made into bar rails in Tredegarrsquos new rolling mill As Francis Deane served as both a
major stockholder in the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1346 SP Adams
the President of the Tredegar Iron Company the purchase of $2500 ndash or 55 of Catharine
Furnacersquos sales in 1838 ndash worth of pig iron benefited both firms16
John hoped to reach markets outside the Old Dominion in Catharine Furnacersquos initial
years of iron production His years spent working the dry goods trade in the North offered
some contacts his extensive family connections offered other potential forms of social
capital While his younger brother Charles Carter Wellford was in New York City on
business in 1838 John shipped a sample of Catharine Furnace iron for testing in that
market The iron must have answered relatively well as Wood Johnston amp Burritt a dry
goods firm in New York City with ties to Richmond Virginia purchased $22818 worth of
iron from Wellford that same year Three years later Wood Johnston and Burritt sold
another $116729 worth of Catharine Furnace iron shipped to them via the schooner
Andrew Browne The only other out-of-state customer in 1838 was CG Morris of
Charleston South Carolina who purchased $22818 worth of pig iron and sash weights
from Wellford17
The quest for new markets continued over the next few years with varying levels of
success In February of 1839 Wellford sold two tons of iron to a customer in the District of
Columbia No additional entries appear for this particular buyer so it seems that Catharine
Furnace iron did not take off in the Washington area That same year Wellford shipped six
tons of pig iron to Boston at $2751 per ton The New England market seemed a bit more
promising as Wellford received $291568 in sales from Charles Dyer of Providence
This was most likely pig iron for use by the Phoenix Iron Foundry Company a Providence
firm that manufactured various finished iron products such as gear wheels and specialised
machine tools In 1841 Wellford noted in his account book that lsquoiron was taken to
Portland to try the marketrsquo by Captain Freeman Smith and that Smith sold at least three
tons at $2632 per ton in Maine18
In its early years the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company exploited
Francis Deanersquos high position in Tredegar Iron Company thus making personal
connections between the incorporators essential to the firmrsquos early survival Deane had
been present in the creation of many Virginia ironworks and his personal connections in the
state trade were unparalleled In 1839 alone Tredegar purchased $16500 ndash probably over
500 tons worth ndash of iron from Catharine Furnace As an incorporator of the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company Deane had the opportunity to enrich both his
primary employer as well as his Fredericksburg investment by purchasing pig iron from
Catharine Furnace The following year however sales to Tredegar slowed to $3500 and no
more major transactions between the two companies occurred after 1840 This was in part
due to the financial problems suffered by the TredegarWorks and in particular the result of
Deanersquos inability to sell the firmrsquos products By 1841 the fortunes of the Tredegar Works
were in the words of Kathleen Bruce at a very lsquolow ebbrsquo and Deane was on his way out as
the companyrsquos chief executive the following year Tredegarrsquos ties with Fredericksburg
continued after Deanersquos departure Joseph Reid Anderson contacted John Spotswood
Wellford in the summer of 1841 to inquire about introducing Tredegar iron in
Fredericksburg Apparently the two had discussed the project in Washington DC and
Anderson offered Wellford work as an agent of the Tredegar Iron Works lsquoFrom the prices
paid as I understand and quantity of country iron shipped there from [Richmond]rsquo
Andersonwrote lsquoas well as the high character of the Tred Iron at present I am led to believe
that advantage to all concerned may accrue from its introduction into that marketrsquo Some
Catharine Furnace iron was sold out of Tredegarrsquos yard in Richmond as David J Burr amp
Co purchased seventeen tons in 1841 found that load wanting in quality and so asked
Wellford to replace the iron In the summer of 1845 a manager at Tredegar offered to
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1347
purchase 60 or 70 tons of lsquohigh and mottled Pig Ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace at the
relatively high rate of $28 per ton19
Making shot and shell for Washington
Following Deanersquos departure from Richmond the future of Catharine Furnace was even
more in the hands of John Spotswood Wellford In a sense he used this turn of events to
turn his individual connections ndash in this case much more lsquopersonalrsquo than lsquosocialrsquo capital ndash
to the benefit of his ironmaking business In 1841 Wellford increased his individual
ownership in the company to a little over 40 through the purchase of a controlling
amount of capital stock from one of the original incorporators His son William Wellford
also held Edward Carmichaelrsquos share in trust thus giving the Wellford family functional
command over the firm as they controlled 60 of the corporation The first three full years
of operation at Catharine Furnace had seen sales totals of $450191 in 1838 $18376 in
1839 and $677568 in 1840 ndash a total combined revenue of $2965359 Revenues thus
lagged well behind the accumulated operating costs of the furnace that had run to
$6874891 by 1840 Figure 2 shows this trend Clearly a new business strategy was
needed in order to make this endeavour work as Catharine Furnace had difficulties
breaking into various private markets In the summer of 1841 John Spotswood Wellford
Francis Deane and Edward Carmichael all travelled to Washington DC to seek ordnance
contracts from the United States War Department Like its earlier connections with
Tredegar the firmrsquos directors sought to turn their social capital into financial success 20
As it turns out contracting with the federal government suited Catharine Furnace quite
well so long as John Spotswood Wellford was in charge Ordnance contracts were
arranged between the War or Navy departments and individuals so the status and
reputation of an individual contractor weighed heavy on the process On 11 September
1841 Wellford signed a contract with the Navy to deliver 70000 rounds of 32 lb solid
shot at three cents a pound to Gosport Naval Yard in Norfolk Virginia The contract came
Figure 2 Estimates of operating costs and sales at Catharine Furnace 1837 ndash 46 Source Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1348 SP Adams
into force on 2 February 1842 with the final delivery of shot taking place by 31 January
1844 Pending inspection and satisfaction by the Navy Wellford would receive $67200
from the federal government In the spring of 1842 Catharine Furnace obtained shot
patterns from James Walker That summer at least five moulders William H Ferguson
William Pulham R Parker Nicholas Wharton and A Sutherland were hard at work
making 32 lb solid shot from Catharine Furnace iron and in June of 1842 Wellford sent
his first shipment of 5230 shot to Norfolk Naval records indicate that the ordnance officers
at Gosport received over 24000 shot by the end of 1842 Shipments tended to occur fairly
regularly and Catharine Furnace produced an impressive amount of ordnance in a
relatively short period of time as illustrated in Table 1 Assuming that each piece of 32 lb
solid shot actually weighed 32 pounds ndash an assumption that did not always hold true for
nineteenth-century naval ordnance ndash then the estimated value of Wellfordrsquos contract in
1842 alone was roughly $232089621
On the surface Catharine Furnacersquos success with military contracting put the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company on a strong trajectory With the
federal government providing a strong income stream Wellford might have parlayed his
success in ordnance into wider markets for his iron Historians of technology have
provided many examples in which antebellum military enterprise helped reorganise and
refine production techniques in northern government installations like the armouries at
Springfield Massachusetts and Philadelphia as well as with private contractors like
Connecticutrsquos Samuel Colt Virginiarsquos Harpers Ferry Armory exhibited a less than
exemplary record with regard to streamlining the production of muskets and small arms
But in the end even isolated Harpers Ferry entered the modern industrial age So at least
among northern industries military enterprise was in the words of Merritt Roe Smith a
lsquokey ingredient in the evolution of complex technological systemsrsquo and served as a critical
factor in that regionrsquos antebellum industrialisation22
Rather than diversify its production line or markets Catharine Furnacersquos manager
expanded further into the highly volatile ordnance trade Using his personal connections
with the Navy Wellford secured yet another contract for 70000 32 lb solid shot in
February of 1843 The terms of the contract were the same as the 1841 deal although this
time Wellford had less than a year to complete it Since he shipped only about a third of
this amount from Catharine Furnace in 1842 it is questionable whether or not Wellford
expected to produce all of the contracted shot at his own works It was not uncommon for
contractors even if they owned or operated an iron furnace themselves to sub-contract
Table 1 32 lb solid shot shipped to Gosport naval yard from Catharine Furnace 1842
Amount Received Estimated Value ($)
22 June 1842 5250 504000 22 June 1842 2623 251808 18 July 1842 3507 336672 4 August 1842 1692 162432 20 August 1842 2227 213792 8 September 1842 2102 201792 22 September 1842 1401 134496 3 October 1842 1874 179904 3 November 1842 3500 336000 Total 24176 2320896
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1349
production out to other firms at times In fact Wellford notes in his account book that 118
tons of pig iron shipped from the Fredericksburg wharf to Catharine Furnace in 1842 to be
melted into ball in his cupola furnaces Whether or not he had purchased this iron from
other furnaces or recalled it from pig iron meant for sale elsewhere is unclear But a year
later Wellford paid for 55 cartloads or 275 tons of pig iron from the Fredericksburg
wharf back to Catharine Furnace noting that this iron had been sent back from Boston
unsold lsquoon acct of its being so whitersquo and lsquowas therefore worked into ballrsquo23
Producing shot for the Navy secured a solid stream of income for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as a steady demand for iron for the
workers at Catharine Furnace These ordnance contracts required constant vigilance
however as Wellford visited Washington DC on numerous occasions to maintain his
personal connections with the War Department He also paid William Ridgely $8500 lsquofor
arranging accts and settling with [the] Naval Boardrsquo in 1842 Ridgely was a long-time
employee of the Navy who had been the Chief Clerk of the Naval Commissioners until
September of 1842 when he took a new position as Chief Clerk to the Bureau of Navy
Yards and Docks Sporadic payments to Ridgely ranging from $2000 to $10000
continued over the next few years but Wellfordrsquos entries do not give a full account of the
services rendered to him It is likely that Wellfordrsquos various contacts in Washington
provided him with valuable information When he learned that a Baltimore firm had failed
to supply 5000 cannon shot and that inspection officials had rejected 5000 additional units
Wellford wrote to Commodore WM Crane to see if he could provide any information
about securing a contract for himself to make up the 10000 in lost shot to the Navy24
Wellford also tried to squeeze larger profit margins out of the contract by rearranging
one of Catharine Furnacersquos great economic disadvantages ndash its high cost of transportation
The 1843 contract for example had an allowance of $2 per ton from Catharine Furnace to
Fredericksburg and another $1 per ton from Fredericksburg to Gosport In March of 1843
a naval official informed Wellford that lsquoafter reciting the price to be given for the shot
transportation to Fredericksburg and freight that no other allowance is to be madersquo for
shipping shot to Norfolk Whether or not the inspection of the ordnance occurred at
the furnace or at the naval yard was another factor in making contracts profitable Shot
and shell that was rejected at Catharine Furnace could be recast cheaply on the spot
rejected ordnance at Gosport needed to be shipped back to the furnace at the companyrsquos
expense Shipments to Gosport in the summer of 1843 were delayed by late arrival of an
inspection officer to Fredericksburg Some years later Wellford complained to the Navy
that their insistence upon inspections at the yard increased his already prohibitive
transportation costs25
Needless to say Wellford found ordnance a lucrative business for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company By 1843 Wellfordrsquos contracts with the War
Department were providing nearly all of Catharine Furnacersquos income This strategy
carried some risk as Wellford lost out on a contract to provide shot and shell for the Navy
in 1844 This contract went to the Tredegar Company now under the leadership of Joseph
Reid Anderson and making not only basic ordnance like shot and shell but also casting
cannon for the Federal government Like Catharine Furnace Tredegar drew upon strong
personal connections to Washington officials to secure these contracts Eastern Virginiarsquos
iron trade therefore relied almost completely on the federal statersquos demand for ordnance
This dependence proved tenuous when Wellfordrsquos relationship with the Navy soured in
1845 to the point that he was ordered to send back the governmentrsquos shot gauge gauge
plate and cylinders as well as any other instruments for shot inspection26
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1350 SP Adams
Wellford found making shot for the Navy to be a financially rewarding endeavour
even as it carried risks In a memorandum written into his account book he justified a
$344450 commission or 5 on his Navy contract in 1843 for lsquofurnishing the required
security and taking the contract in my name for better or for worsersquo lsquoThis contract I gave
the furnace of the advantage ofrsquo he continued lsquoand I do not hesitate to say that I could
have sold it for a profit of 10 per cent [] I would give that to day for a similar onersquo
Completing the Navyrsquos contract on 32 lb shot he argued in late 1844 kept him lsquo5 days in
the week absent from his familyrsquo and so he considered his personal charge of $122191 on
the yearrsquos receipts to be perfectly reasonable Wellford had reason to value his experience
with the Navy as he received $3226320 worth of contracts in the 1844 ndash45 fiscal year to
provide shot and shell for the Navyrsquos land-based fortifications These contracts accounted
for 272 of the Navyrsquos expenditure for this purpose and it made Wellford the single
largest naval ordnance contractor in the nation Losing this lucrative stream of income hurt
the future financial prospects of Catharine Furnace27
Rather than dwell on the failures with the Navy Wellford jumped into the manufacture
of 8 and 10 inch artillery shells and 12 and 24 lb solid shot for the US Army by signing a
$2442827 contract in 1844 He also upped his own commission to 10 arguing again
that he was remaining personally responsible for the contract lsquoThis contract I gave the
Furnace the advantage ofrsquo he argued in defence of his $241697 from the companyrsquos
account Rather than sub-contract out the work to other ironworks Wellford reminded his
partners that he planned to keep all of the Army business at Catharine Furnace He did not
lsquohesitate to say I could have sold it for a much larger advancersquo for his own personal profit
In the summer of 1844 Wellford rushed shell patterns from an armoury in Washington
and after receiving guidance from ordnance officer Colonel George Talcott was shipping
shot and shells to Fort Monroe For this job Wellford secured a favourable rate of 4 cents
for 10 inch shells 5 cents for 8 inch shells and 314 cents for 12 and 24 lb solid shot
Although the initial contract was for a little under $25000 Wellford continued to make
shot and shell for the Army well into 1846 by signing several small contracts in 1845 and a
large $1244469 order in 1846 Since Wellford upped his commission to 15 for that later
work he clearly felt that his personal stake in the army contracts merited a larger share of
the companyrsquos profits28
John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal fortunes with Catharine Furnace had finally
seemed to turn the corner By 1846 he had acquired a controlling interest in the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company by purchasing more shares in the
corporation bringing ownership stake to three-fifths Charles Dyer of Providence
moreover had recently concluded that lsquothis is as good if not the best market in the country
to dispose of all he has or may in future makersquo for Catharine Furnace pig iron Wellford
had 150 to 200 tons of pig iron on hand at the Fredericksburg wharf ready to ship out to the
Northeast Although the prospects of many Virginia charcoal iron furnaces seemed to be
on the decline in the face of Pennsylvaniarsquos anthracite ironmakers Wellfordrsquos connections
with the War Department and the suggestion of a niche market for Catharine Furnacersquos
lsquogray ironrsquo in Providence offered a glimpse of hope in late 184629
Following the outbreak of the War with Mexico Navy officials approached Wellford
about a new contract for shot and shell On 3 September 1846 the head of the Navyrsquos
Bureau of Ordnance Commodore Louis Warrington praised Wellfordrsquos past service and
in light of a shortage of shot and shell offered Wellford the opportunity to provide 10000
units of solid 32 lb shot and 7000 shells for 32 lb cannons for the Navy Wellford
responded in the positive as Commodore Warrington sent out a contract in October or
November of 1846 for his signature However Wellford never signed the contract and in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1351
late December of 1846 the residents of Fredericksburg were startled to discover that John
Spotswood Wellford the driving force behind so many social economic and political
movements in Spotsylvania County had died at the moment when Catharine Furnace
seemed on the brink of big success30
In the wake of Johnrsquos death the future direction of Catharine Furnace was in doubt
Edward Carmichael now living in Richmond attempted to assume control over Wellfordrsquos
Navy contract for 10000 32 lb shot and 7000 shells in early January 1847 As William
Wellford stalled in settling his fatherrsquos estate Carmichael argued that the Navy should
transfer the Catharine Furnace work to his authority Carmichael also undertook some
contracts to supply Army ordnance that he expected to be filled with Catharine Furnace
iron He immediately wrote to Fredericksburg asking for two or three pigs of lsquothe very best
Gray ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace to be sent to Richmond immediately so that he could
complete this contract at local forges In early February a lsquofearfulrsquo Carmichael advised
William to ship any remaining shot and shell on the Catharine Furnace grounds to Norfolk
by mid-March so as to fulfil any obligations he had to the Navy By late February William
had taken inventory of the remaining ordnance stock at Catharine Furnace and agreed to
ship the shot and shell on hand for the Army and to lsquomould the 24 lb Solid Shot and the 32
lb Sold Shot for the Navy with one workman on eachrsquo through mid-March The completion
of this final contract would be the last bit of ordnance manufacture done at Catharine
Furnace during the 1840s as William Wellford made clear in his correspondence that he
had no interest in pursuing the business further31
With John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos death then Catharine Furnacersquos future was in doubt
William Wellford Johnrsquos son became the de facto manager at the furnace although he
seemed to be a reluctant heir to this position William wrote to Edward Carmichael in early
1847 that lsquoI can by no means accept the execution of the Navy contractrsquo and that it
lsquoappears to be equally illegal for you and Mr C acting as surviving partners to undertake
itrsquo Because the Army and Navy contracted with individuals and not corporations John
Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal estate ndash not the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company ndash were the only ones authorised to complete any remaining
work Indeed the firmrsquos attorney had recently advised that William was only authorised to
continue Catharine Furnacersquos operations lsquofor the purpose of completing the execution of
any contracts which may have been entered into but not fully executed by his testator at
the time of his deathrsquo and that lsquoAt the death of Mr Wellford the partnership which existed
between himself amp others in the iron works ceased except for the purpose of completing
existing engagements and winding up the businessrsquo Only a few weeks later the trustee of
Francis Deanersquos share in the firm Richard H Cunningham announced that after several
meetings with William Wellford it was clear that he lsquohad no desire or intention of
purchasing the propertyrsquo and that the best course of action would be to liquidate the
physical assets of the corporation and ask $40000 for the lsquoEstate Fixtures and Mules (not
including any Pig Iron)rsquo By early April Fredericksburgrsquos Democratic Recorder
advertised the a June sale at auction of lsquoThe Catharine Furnace with Dwelling 4648 acres
of land containing iron ore well wooded fixtures patterns stock steam engine house
cupolas blacksmithrsquos tools ampc ampc with everything requisite for a complete iron
manufacturing establishmentrsquo32
Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
Was Catharine Furnace successful This is a difficult question to address without
understanding the early context in which the firm operated as well as its utter dependence
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1352 SP Adams
upon the personal capital of John Spotswood Wellford The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company struggled to find a reliable outlet for the products of Catharine
Furnace during its early history Local state and national trends created an unfavourable
atmosphere for starting an iron smelting operation during the late 1830s and early 1840s
John Wellford would have been well aware of his disadvantages in this regard As a longshy
time Fredericksburg resident with first-hand familiarity of the grandiose visions false
starts and frustrating stalls of local projects such as the Rappahannock Navigation
Company or the Fredericksburg and Potomac Creek Railroad Company Wellford
followed his entrepreneurial instincts into less traditional markets for ironmakers Rather
than wait for Fredericksburgrsquos prospects to magically reverse or dump his own financial
resources into a new improvement or manufacturing investment Wellford used his long
history of political and economic contacts to his firmrsquos advantage Military contracts
shifted the responsibility of success or failure into an entirely new area of risk ndash
Wellfordrsquos ability to maintain his contacts in the Navy and War departments and to spin
them into lucrative contracts for the production of shot and shell In the short term the
firmrsquos reliance upon government contracts saved Catharine Furnace and made the
operation profitable
In the long run though the dependency on John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal capital
bound the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company to its
owner and manager This was not the sort of social capital that could transfer easily to either
Johnrsquos family or his fellow incorporators In the end it was not Wellfordrsquos lack of
entrepreneurial talent that limited Catharine Furnacersquos long-term prospects but perhaps his
creative way of overcoming the various obstacles to profitable ironmaking that existed in
antebellum Virginia But just as traditional forms of financial capital need a strong
institutional environment to be effective so does social or personal capital need a
favourable context The Old Dominion for various reasons did not provide that favourable
context Wellfordrsquos case then offers an example of how his particular entrepreneurial
strategy offers up a short-term success story while at the same time exposing the difficult
context that industrial endeavours faced in the antebellum South
Local factors endemic to Fredericksburg for example played a large role in
amplifying the long-term weakness of relying upon personal rather than physical capital
for Catharine Furnace The most promising regional market Richmond essentially closed
up to Catharine Furnace pig iron by the early 1840s Once Francis Deane left the employ of
the Tredegar Company that firm failed to make massive purchases of Catharine Furnace
iron As the James River and Kanawha Canal linked the ironmakers of the Valley of
Virginia to Richmond moreover Catharine Furnace was further left out of the mix
Without the strong connections to market Wellfordrsquos successors most likely would have
continued to struggle to compete with other more integrated ironmakers In a larger sense
Fredericksburgrsquos entire manufacturing economy was being squeezed out of the picture
during the antebellum period as local boosters failed to make the necessary investments in
the regionrsquos physical infrastructure Geographer Keith Littlefield estimates that the city
lost control over 76 of the trade in its rural hinterland by 1860 as Richmond and
Alexandria expanded their commercial reach at Fredericksburgrsquos expense John
Wellfordrsquos own experience with failed turnpikes river improvements and railroads
during his pre-ironmaking days signalled a failure to secure a variety of market outlets for
Fredericksburgrsquos manufacturers Because Wellfordrsquos furnace produced pig iron ndash a high
bulk and low value commodity ndash shipping costs were a major factor in marketing its
products afar Since the cityrsquos commercial and manufacturing sector served a smaller and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
1346 SP Adams
the President of the Tredegar Iron Company the purchase of $2500 ndash or 55 of Catharine
Furnacersquos sales in 1838 ndash worth of pig iron benefited both firms16
John hoped to reach markets outside the Old Dominion in Catharine Furnacersquos initial
years of iron production His years spent working the dry goods trade in the North offered
some contacts his extensive family connections offered other potential forms of social
capital While his younger brother Charles Carter Wellford was in New York City on
business in 1838 John shipped a sample of Catharine Furnace iron for testing in that
market The iron must have answered relatively well as Wood Johnston amp Burritt a dry
goods firm in New York City with ties to Richmond Virginia purchased $22818 worth of
iron from Wellford that same year Three years later Wood Johnston and Burritt sold
another $116729 worth of Catharine Furnace iron shipped to them via the schooner
Andrew Browne The only other out-of-state customer in 1838 was CG Morris of
Charleston South Carolina who purchased $22818 worth of pig iron and sash weights
from Wellford17
The quest for new markets continued over the next few years with varying levels of
success In February of 1839 Wellford sold two tons of iron to a customer in the District of
Columbia No additional entries appear for this particular buyer so it seems that Catharine
Furnace iron did not take off in the Washington area That same year Wellford shipped six
tons of pig iron to Boston at $2751 per ton The New England market seemed a bit more
promising as Wellford received $291568 in sales from Charles Dyer of Providence
This was most likely pig iron for use by the Phoenix Iron Foundry Company a Providence
firm that manufactured various finished iron products such as gear wheels and specialised
machine tools In 1841 Wellford noted in his account book that lsquoiron was taken to
Portland to try the marketrsquo by Captain Freeman Smith and that Smith sold at least three
tons at $2632 per ton in Maine18
In its early years the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company exploited
Francis Deanersquos high position in Tredegar Iron Company thus making personal
connections between the incorporators essential to the firmrsquos early survival Deane had
been present in the creation of many Virginia ironworks and his personal connections in the
state trade were unparalleled In 1839 alone Tredegar purchased $16500 ndash probably over
500 tons worth ndash of iron from Catharine Furnace As an incorporator of the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company Deane had the opportunity to enrich both his
primary employer as well as his Fredericksburg investment by purchasing pig iron from
Catharine Furnace The following year however sales to Tredegar slowed to $3500 and no
more major transactions between the two companies occurred after 1840 This was in part
due to the financial problems suffered by the TredegarWorks and in particular the result of
Deanersquos inability to sell the firmrsquos products By 1841 the fortunes of the Tredegar Works
were in the words of Kathleen Bruce at a very lsquolow ebbrsquo and Deane was on his way out as
the companyrsquos chief executive the following year Tredegarrsquos ties with Fredericksburg
continued after Deanersquos departure Joseph Reid Anderson contacted John Spotswood
Wellford in the summer of 1841 to inquire about introducing Tredegar iron in
Fredericksburg Apparently the two had discussed the project in Washington DC and
Anderson offered Wellford work as an agent of the Tredegar Iron Works lsquoFrom the prices
paid as I understand and quantity of country iron shipped there from [Richmond]rsquo
Andersonwrote lsquoas well as the high character of the Tred Iron at present I am led to believe
that advantage to all concerned may accrue from its introduction into that marketrsquo Some
Catharine Furnace iron was sold out of Tredegarrsquos yard in Richmond as David J Burr amp
Co purchased seventeen tons in 1841 found that load wanting in quality and so asked
Wellford to replace the iron In the summer of 1845 a manager at Tredegar offered to
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1347
purchase 60 or 70 tons of lsquohigh and mottled Pig Ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace at the
relatively high rate of $28 per ton19
Making shot and shell for Washington
Following Deanersquos departure from Richmond the future of Catharine Furnace was even
more in the hands of John Spotswood Wellford In a sense he used this turn of events to
turn his individual connections ndash in this case much more lsquopersonalrsquo than lsquosocialrsquo capital ndash
to the benefit of his ironmaking business In 1841 Wellford increased his individual
ownership in the company to a little over 40 through the purchase of a controlling
amount of capital stock from one of the original incorporators His son William Wellford
also held Edward Carmichaelrsquos share in trust thus giving the Wellford family functional
command over the firm as they controlled 60 of the corporation The first three full years
of operation at Catharine Furnace had seen sales totals of $450191 in 1838 $18376 in
1839 and $677568 in 1840 ndash a total combined revenue of $2965359 Revenues thus
lagged well behind the accumulated operating costs of the furnace that had run to
$6874891 by 1840 Figure 2 shows this trend Clearly a new business strategy was
needed in order to make this endeavour work as Catharine Furnace had difficulties
breaking into various private markets In the summer of 1841 John Spotswood Wellford
Francis Deane and Edward Carmichael all travelled to Washington DC to seek ordnance
contracts from the United States War Department Like its earlier connections with
Tredegar the firmrsquos directors sought to turn their social capital into financial success 20
As it turns out contracting with the federal government suited Catharine Furnace quite
well so long as John Spotswood Wellford was in charge Ordnance contracts were
arranged between the War or Navy departments and individuals so the status and
reputation of an individual contractor weighed heavy on the process On 11 September
1841 Wellford signed a contract with the Navy to deliver 70000 rounds of 32 lb solid
shot at three cents a pound to Gosport Naval Yard in Norfolk Virginia The contract came
Figure 2 Estimates of operating costs and sales at Catharine Furnace 1837 ndash 46 Source Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1348 SP Adams
into force on 2 February 1842 with the final delivery of shot taking place by 31 January
1844 Pending inspection and satisfaction by the Navy Wellford would receive $67200
from the federal government In the spring of 1842 Catharine Furnace obtained shot
patterns from James Walker That summer at least five moulders William H Ferguson
William Pulham R Parker Nicholas Wharton and A Sutherland were hard at work
making 32 lb solid shot from Catharine Furnace iron and in June of 1842 Wellford sent
his first shipment of 5230 shot to Norfolk Naval records indicate that the ordnance officers
at Gosport received over 24000 shot by the end of 1842 Shipments tended to occur fairly
regularly and Catharine Furnace produced an impressive amount of ordnance in a
relatively short period of time as illustrated in Table 1 Assuming that each piece of 32 lb
solid shot actually weighed 32 pounds ndash an assumption that did not always hold true for
nineteenth-century naval ordnance ndash then the estimated value of Wellfordrsquos contract in
1842 alone was roughly $232089621
On the surface Catharine Furnacersquos success with military contracting put the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company on a strong trajectory With the
federal government providing a strong income stream Wellford might have parlayed his
success in ordnance into wider markets for his iron Historians of technology have
provided many examples in which antebellum military enterprise helped reorganise and
refine production techniques in northern government installations like the armouries at
Springfield Massachusetts and Philadelphia as well as with private contractors like
Connecticutrsquos Samuel Colt Virginiarsquos Harpers Ferry Armory exhibited a less than
exemplary record with regard to streamlining the production of muskets and small arms
But in the end even isolated Harpers Ferry entered the modern industrial age So at least
among northern industries military enterprise was in the words of Merritt Roe Smith a
lsquokey ingredient in the evolution of complex technological systemsrsquo and served as a critical
factor in that regionrsquos antebellum industrialisation22
Rather than diversify its production line or markets Catharine Furnacersquos manager
expanded further into the highly volatile ordnance trade Using his personal connections
with the Navy Wellford secured yet another contract for 70000 32 lb solid shot in
February of 1843 The terms of the contract were the same as the 1841 deal although this
time Wellford had less than a year to complete it Since he shipped only about a third of
this amount from Catharine Furnace in 1842 it is questionable whether or not Wellford
expected to produce all of the contracted shot at his own works It was not uncommon for
contractors even if they owned or operated an iron furnace themselves to sub-contract
Table 1 32 lb solid shot shipped to Gosport naval yard from Catharine Furnace 1842
Amount Received Estimated Value ($)
22 June 1842 5250 504000 22 June 1842 2623 251808 18 July 1842 3507 336672 4 August 1842 1692 162432 20 August 1842 2227 213792 8 September 1842 2102 201792 22 September 1842 1401 134496 3 October 1842 1874 179904 3 November 1842 3500 336000 Total 24176 2320896
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1349
production out to other firms at times In fact Wellford notes in his account book that 118
tons of pig iron shipped from the Fredericksburg wharf to Catharine Furnace in 1842 to be
melted into ball in his cupola furnaces Whether or not he had purchased this iron from
other furnaces or recalled it from pig iron meant for sale elsewhere is unclear But a year
later Wellford paid for 55 cartloads or 275 tons of pig iron from the Fredericksburg
wharf back to Catharine Furnace noting that this iron had been sent back from Boston
unsold lsquoon acct of its being so whitersquo and lsquowas therefore worked into ballrsquo23
Producing shot for the Navy secured a solid stream of income for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as a steady demand for iron for the
workers at Catharine Furnace These ordnance contracts required constant vigilance
however as Wellford visited Washington DC on numerous occasions to maintain his
personal connections with the War Department He also paid William Ridgely $8500 lsquofor
arranging accts and settling with [the] Naval Boardrsquo in 1842 Ridgely was a long-time
employee of the Navy who had been the Chief Clerk of the Naval Commissioners until
September of 1842 when he took a new position as Chief Clerk to the Bureau of Navy
Yards and Docks Sporadic payments to Ridgely ranging from $2000 to $10000
continued over the next few years but Wellfordrsquos entries do not give a full account of the
services rendered to him It is likely that Wellfordrsquos various contacts in Washington
provided him with valuable information When he learned that a Baltimore firm had failed
to supply 5000 cannon shot and that inspection officials had rejected 5000 additional units
Wellford wrote to Commodore WM Crane to see if he could provide any information
about securing a contract for himself to make up the 10000 in lost shot to the Navy24
Wellford also tried to squeeze larger profit margins out of the contract by rearranging
one of Catharine Furnacersquos great economic disadvantages ndash its high cost of transportation
The 1843 contract for example had an allowance of $2 per ton from Catharine Furnace to
Fredericksburg and another $1 per ton from Fredericksburg to Gosport In March of 1843
a naval official informed Wellford that lsquoafter reciting the price to be given for the shot
transportation to Fredericksburg and freight that no other allowance is to be madersquo for
shipping shot to Norfolk Whether or not the inspection of the ordnance occurred at
the furnace or at the naval yard was another factor in making contracts profitable Shot
and shell that was rejected at Catharine Furnace could be recast cheaply on the spot
rejected ordnance at Gosport needed to be shipped back to the furnace at the companyrsquos
expense Shipments to Gosport in the summer of 1843 were delayed by late arrival of an
inspection officer to Fredericksburg Some years later Wellford complained to the Navy
that their insistence upon inspections at the yard increased his already prohibitive
transportation costs25
Needless to say Wellford found ordnance a lucrative business for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company By 1843 Wellfordrsquos contracts with the War
Department were providing nearly all of Catharine Furnacersquos income This strategy
carried some risk as Wellford lost out on a contract to provide shot and shell for the Navy
in 1844 This contract went to the Tredegar Company now under the leadership of Joseph
Reid Anderson and making not only basic ordnance like shot and shell but also casting
cannon for the Federal government Like Catharine Furnace Tredegar drew upon strong
personal connections to Washington officials to secure these contracts Eastern Virginiarsquos
iron trade therefore relied almost completely on the federal statersquos demand for ordnance
This dependence proved tenuous when Wellfordrsquos relationship with the Navy soured in
1845 to the point that he was ordered to send back the governmentrsquos shot gauge gauge
plate and cylinders as well as any other instruments for shot inspection26
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1350 SP Adams
Wellford found making shot for the Navy to be a financially rewarding endeavour
even as it carried risks In a memorandum written into his account book he justified a
$344450 commission or 5 on his Navy contract in 1843 for lsquofurnishing the required
security and taking the contract in my name for better or for worsersquo lsquoThis contract I gave
the furnace of the advantage ofrsquo he continued lsquoand I do not hesitate to say that I could
have sold it for a profit of 10 per cent [] I would give that to day for a similar onersquo
Completing the Navyrsquos contract on 32 lb shot he argued in late 1844 kept him lsquo5 days in
the week absent from his familyrsquo and so he considered his personal charge of $122191 on
the yearrsquos receipts to be perfectly reasonable Wellford had reason to value his experience
with the Navy as he received $3226320 worth of contracts in the 1844 ndash45 fiscal year to
provide shot and shell for the Navyrsquos land-based fortifications These contracts accounted
for 272 of the Navyrsquos expenditure for this purpose and it made Wellford the single
largest naval ordnance contractor in the nation Losing this lucrative stream of income hurt
the future financial prospects of Catharine Furnace27
Rather than dwell on the failures with the Navy Wellford jumped into the manufacture
of 8 and 10 inch artillery shells and 12 and 24 lb solid shot for the US Army by signing a
$2442827 contract in 1844 He also upped his own commission to 10 arguing again
that he was remaining personally responsible for the contract lsquoThis contract I gave the
Furnace the advantage ofrsquo he argued in defence of his $241697 from the companyrsquos
account Rather than sub-contract out the work to other ironworks Wellford reminded his
partners that he planned to keep all of the Army business at Catharine Furnace He did not
lsquohesitate to say I could have sold it for a much larger advancersquo for his own personal profit
In the summer of 1844 Wellford rushed shell patterns from an armoury in Washington
and after receiving guidance from ordnance officer Colonel George Talcott was shipping
shot and shells to Fort Monroe For this job Wellford secured a favourable rate of 4 cents
for 10 inch shells 5 cents for 8 inch shells and 314 cents for 12 and 24 lb solid shot
Although the initial contract was for a little under $25000 Wellford continued to make
shot and shell for the Army well into 1846 by signing several small contracts in 1845 and a
large $1244469 order in 1846 Since Wellford upped his commission to 15 for that later
work he clearly felt that his personal stake in the army contracts merited a larger share of
the companyrsquos profits28
John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal fortunes with Catharine Furnace had finally
seemed to turn the corner By 1846 he had acquired a controlling interest in the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company by purchasing more shares in the
corporation bringing ownership stake to three-fifths Charles Dyer of Providence
moreover had recently concluded that lsquothis is as good if not the best market in the country
to dispose of all he has or may in future makersquo for Catharine Furnace pig iron Wellford
had 150 to 200 tons of pig iron on hand at the Fredericksburg wharf ready to ship out to the
Northeast Although the prospects of many Virginia charcoal iron furnaces seemed to be
on the decline in the face of Pennsylvaniarsquos anthracite ironmakers Wellfordrsquos connections
with the War Department and the suggestion of a niche market for Catharine Furnacersquos
lsquogray ironrsquo in Providence offered a glimpse of hope in late 184629
Following the outbreak of the War with Mexico Navy officials approached Wellford
about a new contract for shot and shell On 3 September 1846 the head of the Navyrsquos
Bureau of Ordnance Commodore Louis Warrington praised Wellfordrsquos past service and
in light of a shortage of shot and shell offered Wellford the opportunity to provide 10000
units of solid 32 lb shot and 7000 shells for 32 lb cannons for the Navy Wellford
responded in the positive as Commodore Warrington sent out a contract in October or
November of 1846 for his signature However Wellford never signed the contract and in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1351
late December of 1846 the residents of Fredericksburg were startled to discover that John
Spotswood Wellford the driving force behind so many social economic and political
movements in Spotsylvania County had died at the moment when Catharine Furnace
seemed on the brink of big success30
In the wake of Johnrsquos death the future direction of Catharine Furnace was in doubt
Edward Carmichael now living in Richmond attempted to assume control over Wellfordrsquos
Navy contract for 10000 32 lb shot and 7000 shells in early January 1847 As William
Wellford stalled in settling his fatherrsquos estate Carmichael argued that the Navy should
transfer the Catharine Furnace work to his authority Carmichael also undertook some
contracts to supply Army ordnance that he expected to be filled with Catharine Furnace
iron He immediately wrote to Fredericksburg asking for two or three pigs of lsquothe very best
Gray ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace to be sent to Richmond immediately so that he could
complete this contract at local forges In early February a lsquofearfulrsquo Carmichael advised
William to ship any remaining shot and shell on the Catharine Furnace grounds to Norfolk
by mid-March so as to fulfil any obligations he had to the Navy By late February William
had taken inventory of the remaining ordnance stock at Catharine Furnace and agreed to
ship the shot and shell on hand for the Army and to lsquomould the 24 lb Solid Shot and the 32
lb Sold Shot for the Navy with one workman on eachrsquo through mid-March The completion
of this final contract would be the last bit of ordnance manufacture done at Catharine
Furnace during the 1840s as William Wellford made clear in his correspondence that he
had no interest in pursuing the business further31
With John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos death then Catharine Furnacersquos future was in doubt
William Wellford Johnrsquos son became the de facto manager at the furnace although he
seemed to be a reluctant heir to this position William wrote to Edward Carmichael in early
1847 that lsquoI can by no means accept the execution of the Navy contractrsquo and that it
lsquoappears to be equally illegal for you and Mr C acting as surviving partners to undertake
itrsquo Because the Army and Navy contracted with individuals and not corporations John
Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal estate ndash not the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company ndash were the only ones authorised to complete any remaining
work Indeed the firmrsquos attorney had recently advised that William was only authorised to
continue Catharine Furnacersquos operations lsquofor the purpose of completing the execution of
any contracts which may have been entered into but not fully executed by his testator at
the time of his deathrsquo and that lsquoAt the death of Mr Wellford the partnership which existed
between himself amp others in the iron works ceased except for the purpose of completing
existing engagements and winding up the businessrsquo Only a few weeks later the trustee of
Francis Deanersquos share in the firm Richard H Cunningham announced that after several
meetings with William Wellford it was clear that he lsquohad no desire or intention of
purchasing the propertyrsquo and that the best course of action would be to liquidate the
physical assets of the corporation and ask $40000 for the lsquoEstate Fixtures and Mules (not
including any Pig Iron)rsquo By early April Fredericksburgrsquos Democratic Recorder
advertised the a June sale at auction of lsquoThe Catharine Furnace with Dwelling 4648 acres
of land containing iron ore well wooded fixtures patterns stock steam engine house
cupolas blacksmithrsquos tools ampc ampc with everything requisite for a complete iron
manufacturing establishmentrsquo32
Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
Was Catharine Furnace successful This is a difficult question to address without
understanding the early context in which the firm operated as well as its utter dependence
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1352 SP Adams
upon the personal capital of John Spotswood Wellford The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company struggled to find a reliable outlet for the products of Catharine
Furnace during its early history Local state and national trends created an unfavourable
atmosphere for starting an iron smelting operation during the late 1830s and early 1840s
John Wellford would have been well aware of his disadvantages in this regard As a longshy
time Fredericksburg resident with first-hand familiarity of the grandiose visions false
starts and frustrating stalls of local projects such as the Rappahannock Navigation
Company or the Fredericksburg and Potomac Creek Railroad Company Wellford
followed his entrepreneurial instincts into less traditional markets for ironmakers Rather
than wait for Fredericksburgrsquos prospects to magically reverse or dump his own financial
resources into a new improvement or manufacturing investment Wellford used his long
history of political and economic contacts to his firmrsquos advantage Military contracts
shifted the responsibility of success or failure into an entirely new area of risk ndash
Wellfordrsquos ability to maintain his contacts in the Navy and War departments and to spin
them into lucrative contracts for the production of shot and shell In the short term the
firmrsquos reliance upon government contracts saved Catharine Furnace and made the
operation profitable
In the long run though the dependency on John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal capital
bound the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company to its
owner and manager This was not the sort of social capital that could transfer easily to either
Johnrsquos family or his fellow incorporators In the end it was not Wellfordrsquos lack of
entrepreneurial talent that limited Catharine Furnacersquos long-term prospects but perhaps his
creative way of overcoming the various obstacles to profitable ironmaking that existed in
antebellum Virginia But just as traditional forms of financial capital need a strong
institutional environment to be effective so does social or personal capital need a
favourable context The Old Dominion for various reasons did not provide that favourable
context Wellfordrsquos case then offers an example of how his particular entrepreneurial
strategy offers up a short-term success story while at the same time exposing the difficult
context that industrial endeavours faced in the antebellum South
Local factors endemic to Fredericksburg for example played a large role in
amplifying the long-term weakness of relying upon personal rather than physical capital
for Catharine Furnace The most promising regional market Richmond essentially closed
up to Catharine Furnace pig iron by the early 1840s Once Francis Deane left the employ of
the Tredegar Company that firm failed to make massive purchases of Catharine Furnace
iron As the James River and Kanawha Canal linked the ironmakers of the Valley of
Virginia to Richmond moreover Catharine Furnace was further left out of the mix
Without the strong connections to market Wellfordrsquos successors most likely would have
continued to struggle to compete with other more integrated ironmakers In a larger sense
Fredericksburgrsquos entire manufacturing economy was being squeezed out of the picture
during the antebellum period as local boosters failed to make the necessary investments in
the regionrsquos physical infrastructure Geographer Keith Littlefield estimates that the city
lost control over 76 of the trade in its rural hinterland by 1860 as Richmond and
Alexandria expanded their commercial reach at Fredericksburgrsquos expense John
Wellfordrsquos own experience with failed turnpikes river improvements and railroads
during his pre-ironmaking days signalled a failure to secure a variety of market outlets for
Fredericksburgrsquos manufacturers Because Wellfordrsquos furnace produced pig iron ndash a high
bulk and low value commodity ndash shipping costs were a major factor in marketing its
products afar Since the cityrsquos commercial and manufacturing sector served a smaller and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
Business History 1347
purchase 60 or 70 tons of lsquohigh and mottled Pig Ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace at the
relatively high rate of $28 per ton19
Making shot and shell for Washington
Following Deanersquos departure from Richmond the future of Catharine Furnace was even
more in the hands of John Spotswood Wellford In a sense he used this turn of events to
turn his individual connections ndash in this case much more lsquopersonalrsquo than lsquosocialrsquo capital ndash
to the benefit of his ironmaking business In 1841 Wellford increased his individual
ownership in the company to a little over 40 through the purchase of a controlling
amount of capital stock from one of the original incorporators His son William Wellford
also held Edward Carmichaelrsquos share in trust thus giving the Wellford family functional
command over the firm as they controlled 60 of the corporation The first three full years
of operation at Catharine Furnace had seen sales totals of $450191 in 1838 $18376 in
1839 and $677568 in 1840 ndash a total combined revenue of $2965359 Revenues thus
lagged well behind the accumulated operating costs of the furnace that had run to
$6874891 by 1840 Figure 2 shows this trend Clearly a new business strategy was
needed in order to make this endeavour work as Catharine Furnace had difficulties
breaking into various private markets In the summer of 1841 John Spotswood Wellford
Francis Deane and Edward Carmichael all travelled to Washington DC to seek ordnance
contracts from the United States War Department Like its earlier connections with
Tredegar the firmrsquos directors sought to turn their social capital into financial success 20
As it turns out contracting with the federal government suited Catharine Furnace quite
well so long as John Spotswood Wellford was in charge Ordnance contracts were
arranged between the War or Navy departments and individuals so the status and
reputation of an individual contractor weighed heavy on the process On 11 September
1841 Wellford signed a contract with the Navy to deliver 70000 rounds of 32 lb solid
shot at three cents a pound to Gosport Naval Yard in Norfolk Virginia The contract came
Figure 2 Estimates of operating costs and sales at Catharine Furnace 1837 ndash 46 Source Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1348 SP Adams
into force on 2 February 1842 with the final delivery of shot taking place by 31 January
1844 Pending inspection and satisfaction by the Navy Wellford would receive $67200
from the federal government In the spring of 1842 Catharine Furnace obtained shot
patterns from James Walker That summer at least five moulders William H Ferguson
William Pulham R Parker Nicholas Wharton and A Sutherland were hard at work
making 32 lb solid shot from Catharine Furnace iron and in June of 1842 Wellford sent
his first shipment of 5230 shot to Norfolk Naval records indicate that the ordnance officers
at Gosport received over 24000 shot by the end of 1842 Shipments tended to occur fairly
regularly and Catharine Furnace produced an impressive amount of ordnance in a
relatively short period of time as illustrated in Table 1 Assuming that each piece of 32 lb
solid shot actually weighed 32 pounds ndash an assumption that did not always hold true for
nineteenth-century naval ordnance ndash then the estimated value of Wellfordrsquos contract in
1842 alone was roughly $232089621
On the surface Catharine Furnacersquos success with military contracting put the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company on a strong trajectory With the
federal government providing a strong income stream Wellford might have parlayed his
success in ordnance into wider markets for his iron Historians of technology have
provided many examples in which antebellum military enterprise helped reorganise and
refine production techniques in northern government installations like the armouries at
Springfield Massachusetts and Philadelphia as well as with private contractors like
Connecticutrsquos Samuel Colt Virginiarsquos Harpers Ferry Armory exhibited a less than
exemplary record with regard to streamlining the production of muskets and small arms
But in the end even isolated Harpers Ferry entered the modern industrial age So at least
among northern industries military enterprise was in the words of Merritt Roe Smith a
lsquokey ingredient in the evolution of complex technological systemsrsquo and served as a critical
factor in that regionrsquos antebellum industrialisation22
Rather than diversify its production line or markets Catharine Furnacersquos manager
expanded further into the highly volatile ordnance trade Using his personal connections
with the Navy Wellford secured yet another contract for 70000 32 lb solid shot in
February of 1843 The terms of the contract were the same as the 1841 deal although this
time Wellford had less than a year to complete it Since he shipped only about a third of
this amount from Catharine Furnace in 1842 it is questionable whether or not Wellford
expected to produce all of the contracted shot at his own works It was not uncommon for
contractors even if they owned or operated an iron furnace themselves to sub-contract
Table 1 32 lb solid shot shipped to Gosport naval yard from Catharine Furnace 1842
Amount Received Estimated Value ($)
22 June 1842 5250 504000 22 June 1842 2623 251808 18 July 1842 3507 336672 4 August 1842 1692 162432 20 August 1842 2227 213792 8 September 1842 2102 201792 22 September 1842 1401 134496 3 October 1842 1874 179904 3 November 1842 3500 336000 Total 24176 2320896
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1349
production out to other firms at times In fact Wellford notes in his account book that 118
tons of pig iron shipped from the Fredericksburg wharf to Catharine Furnace in 1842 to be
melted into ball in his cupola furnaces Whether or not he had purchased this iron from
other furnaces or recalled it from pig iron meant for sale elsewhere is unclear But a year
later Wellford paid for 55 cartloads or 275 tons of pig iron from the Fredericksburg
wharf back to Catharine Furnace noting that this iron had been sent back from Boston
unsold lsquoon acct of its being so whitersquo and lsquowas therefore worked into ballrsquo23
Producing shot for the Navy secured a solid stream of income for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as a steady demand for iron for the
workers at Catharine Furnace These ordnance contracts required constant vigilance
however as Wellford visited Washington DC on numerous occasions to maintain his
personal connections with the War Department He also paid William Ridgely $8500 lsquofor
arranging accts and settling with [the] Naval Boardrsquo in 1842 Ridgely was a long-time
employee of the Navy who had been the Chief Clerk of the Naval Commissioners until
September of 1842 when he took a new position as Chief Clerk to the Bureau of Navy
Yards and Docks Sporadic payments to Ridgely ranging from $2000 to $10000
continued over the next few years but Wellfordrsquos entries do not give a full account of the
services rendered to him It is likely that Wellfordrsquos various contacts in Washington
provided him with valuable information When he learned that a Baltimore firm had failed
to supply 5000 cannon shot and that inspection officials had rejected 5000 additional units
Wellford wrote to Commodore WM Crane to see if he could provide any information
about securing a contract for himself to make up the 10000 in lost shot to the Navy24
Wellford also tried to squeeze larger profit margins out of the contract by rearranging
one of Catharine Furnacersquos great economic disadvantages ndash its high cost of transportation
The 1843 contract for example had an allowance of $2 per ton from Catharine Furnace to
Fredericksburg and another $1 per ton from Fredericksburg to Gosport In March of 1843
a naval official informed Wellford that lsquoafter reciting the price to be given for the shot
transportation to Fredericksburg and freight that no other allowance is to be madersquo for
shipping shot to Norfolk Whether or not the inspection of the ordnance occurred at
the furnace or at the naval yard was another factor in making contracts profitable Shot
and shell that was rejected at Catharine Furnace could be recast cheaply on the spot
rejected ordnance at Gosport needed to be shipped back to the furnace at the companyrsquos
expense Shipments to Gosport in the summer of 1843 were delayed by late arrival of an
inspection officer to Fredericksburg Some years later Wellford complained to the Navy
that their insistence upon inspections at the yard increased his already prohibitive
transportation costs25
Needless to say Wellford found ordnance a lucrative business for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company By 1843 Wellfordrsquos contracts with the War
Department were providing nearly all of Catharine Furnacersquos income This strategy
carried some risk as Wellford lost out on a contract to provide shot and shell for the Navy
in 1844 This contract went to the Tredegar Company now under the leadership of Joseph
Reid Anderson and making not only basic ordnance like shot and shell but also casting
cannon for the Federal government Like Catharine Furnace Tredegar drew upon strong
personal connections to Washington officials to secure these contracts Eastern Virginiarsquos
iron trade therefore relied almost completely on the federal statersquos demand for ordnance
This dependence proved tenuous when Wellfordrsquos relationship with the Navy soured in
1845 to the point that he was ordered to send back the governmentrsquos shot gauge gauge
plate and cylinders as well as any other instruments for shot inspection26
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1350 SP Adams
Wellford found making shot for the Navy to be a financially rewarding endeavour
even as it carried risks In a memorandum written into his account book he justified a
$344450 commission or 5 on his Navy contract in 1843 for lsquofurnishing the required
security and taking the contract in my name for better or for worsersquo lsquoThis contract I gave
the furnace of the advantage ofrsquo he continued lsquoand I do not hesitate to say that I could
have sold it for a profit of 10 per cent [] I would give that to day for a similar onersquo
Completing the Navyrsquos contract on 32 lb shot he argued in late 1844 kept him lsquo5 days in
the week absent from his familyrsquo and so he considered his personal charge of $122191 on
the yearrsquos receipts to be perfectly reasonable Wellford had reason to value his experience
with the Navy as he received $3226320 worth of contracts in the 1844 ndash45 fiscal year to
provide shot and shell for the Navyrsquos land-based fortifications These contracts accounted
for 272 of the Navyrsquos expenditure for this purpose and it made Wellford the single
largest naval ordnance contractor in the nation Losing this lucrative stream of income hurt
the future financial prospects of Catharine Furnace27
Rather than dwell on the failures with the Navy Wellford jumped into the manufacture
of 8 and 10 inch artillery shells and 12 and 24 lb solid shot for the US Army by signing a
$2442827 contract in 1844 He also upped his own commission to 10 arguing again
that he was remaining personally responsible for the contract lsquoThis contract I gave the
Furnace the advantage ofrsquo he argued in defence of his $241697 from the companyrsquos
account Rather than sub-contract out the work to other ironworks Wellford reminded his
partners that he planned to keep all of the Army business at Catharine Furnace He did not
lsquohesitate to say I could have sold it for a much larger advancersquo for his own personal profit
In the summer of 1844 Wellford rushed shell patterns from an armoury in Washington
and after receiving guidance from ordnance officer Colonel George Talcott was shipping
shot and shells to Fort Monroe For this job Wellford secured a favourable rate of 4 cents
for 10 inch shells 5 cents for 8 inch shells and 314 cents for 12 and 24 lb solid shot
Although the initial contract was for a little under $25000 Wellford continued to make
shot and shell for the Army well into 1846 by signing several small contracts in 1845 and a
large $1244469 order in 1846 Since Wellford upped his commission to 15 for that later
work he clearly felt that his personal stake in the army contracts merited a larger share of
the companyrsquos profits28
John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal fortunes with Catharine Furnace had finally
seemed to turn the corner By 1846 he had acquired a controlling interest in the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company by purchasing more shares in the
corporation bringing ownership stake to three-fifths Charles Dyer of Providence
moreover had recently concluded that lsquothis is as good if not the best market in the country
to dispose of all he has or may in future makersquo for Catharine Furnace pig iron Wellford
had 150 to 200 tons of pig iron on hand at the Fredericksburg wharf ready to ship out to the
Northeast Although the prospects of many Virginia charcoal iron furnaces seemed to be
on the decline in the face of Pennsylvaniarsquos anthracite ironmakers Wellfordrsquos connections
with the War Department and the suggestion of a niche market for Catharine Furnacersquos
lsquogray ironrsquo in Providence offered a glimpse of hope in late 184629
Following the outbreak of the War with Mexico Navy officials approached Wellford
about a new contract for shot and shell On 3 September 1846 the head of the Navyrsquos
Bureau of Ordnance Commodore Louis Warrington praised Wellfordrsquos past service and
in light of a shortage of shot and shell offered Wellford the opportunity to provide 10000
units of solid 32 lb shot and 7000 shells for 32 lb cannons for the Navy Wellford
responded in the positive as Commodore Warrington sent out a contract in October or
November of 1846 for his signature However Wellford never signed the contract and in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1351
late December of 1846 the residents of Fredericksburg were startled to discover that John
Spotswood Wellford the driving force behind so many social economic and political
movements in Spotsylvania County had died at the moment when Catharine Furnace
seemed on the brink of big success30
In the wake of Johnrsquos death the future direction of Catharine Furnace was in doubt
Edward Carmichael now living in Richmond attempted to assume control over Wellfordrsquos
Navy contract for 10000 32 lb shot and 7000 shells in early January 1847 As William
Wellford stalled in settling his fatherrsquos estate Carmichael argued that the Navy should
transfer the Catharine Furnace work to his authority Carmichael also undertook some
contracts to supply Army ordnance that he expected to be filled with Catharine Furnace
iron He immediately wrote to Fredericksburg asking for two or three pigs of lsquothe very best
Gray ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace to be sent to Richmond immediately so that he could
complete this contract at local forges In early February a lsquofearfulrsquo Carmichael advised
William to ship any remaining shot and shell on the Catharine Furnace grounds to Norfolk
by mid-March so as to fulfil any obligations he had to the Navy By late February William
had taken inventory of the remaining ordnance stock at Catharine Furnace and agreed to
ship the shot and shell on hand for the Army and to lsquomould the 24 lb Solid Shot and the 32
lb Sold Shot for the Navy with one workman on eachrsquo through mid-March The completion
of this final contract would be the last bit of ordnance manufacture done at Catharine
Furnace during the 1840s as William Wellford made clear in his correspondence that he
had no interest in pursuing the business further31
With John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos death then Catharine Furnacersquos future was in doubt
William Wellford Johnrsquos son became the de facto manager at the furnace although he
seemed to be a reluctant heir to this position William wrote to Edward Carmichael in early
1847 that lsquoI can by no means accept the execution of the Navy contractrsquo and that it
lsquoappears to be equally illegal for you and Mr C acting as surviving partners to undertake
itrsquo Because the Army and Navy contracted with individuals and not corporations John
Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal estate ndash not the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company ndash were the only ones authorised to complete any remaining
work Indeed the firmrsquos attorney had recently advised that William was only authorised to
continue Catharine Furnacersquos operations lsquofor the purpose of completing the execution of
any contracts which may have been entered into but not fully executed by his testator at
the time of his deathrsquo and that lsquoAt the death of Mr Wellford the partnership which existed
between himself amp others in the iron works ceased except for the purpose of completing
existing engagements and winding up the businessrsquo Only a few weeks later the trustee of
Francis Deanersquos share in the firm Richard H Cunningham announced that after several
meetings with William Wellford it was clear that he lsquohad no desire or intention of
purchasing the propertyrsquo and that the best course of action would be to liquidate the
physical assets of the corporation and ask $40000 for the lsquoEstate Fixtures and Mules (not
including any Pig Iron)rsquo By early April Fredericksburgrsquos Democratic Recorder
advertised the a June sale at auction of lsquoThe Catharine Furnace with Dwelling 4648 acres
of land containing iron ore well wooded fixtures patterns stock steam engine house
cupolas blacksmithrsquos tools ampc ampc with everything requisite for a complete iron
manufacturing establishmentrsquo32
Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
Was Catharine Furnace successful This is a difficult question to address without
understanding the early context in which the firm operated as well as its utter dependence
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1352 SP Adams
upon the personal capital of John Spotswood Wellford The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company struggled to find a reliable outlet for the products of Catharine
Furnace during its early history Local state and national trends created an unfavourable
atmosphere for starting an iron smelting operation during the late 1830s and early 1840s
John Wellford would have been well aware of his disadvantages in this regard As a longshy
time Fredericksburg resident with first-hand familiarity of the grandiose visions false
starts and frustrating stalls of local projects such as the Rappahannock Navigation
Company or the Fredericksburg and Potomac Creek Railroad Company Wellford
followed his entrepreneurial instincts into less traditional markets for ironmakers Rather
than wait for Fredericksburgrsquos prospects to magically reverse or dump his own financial
resources into a new improvement or manufacturing investment Wellford used his long
history of political and economic contacts to his firmrsquos advantage Military contracts
shifted the responsibility of success or failure into an entirely new area of risk ndash
Wellfordrsquos ability to maintain his contacts in the Navy and War departments and to spin
them into lucrative contracts for the production of shot and shell In the short term the
firmrsquos reliance upon government contracts saved Catharine Furnace and made the
operation profitable
In the long run though the dependency on John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal capital
bound the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company to its
owner and manager This was not the sort of social capital that could transfer easily to either
Johnrsquos family or his fellow incorporators In the end it was not Wellfordrsquos lack of
entrepreneurial talent that limited Catharine Furnacersquos long-term prospects but perhaps his
creative way of overcoming the various obstacles to profitable ironmaking that existed in
antebellum Virginia But just as traditional forms of financial capital need a strong
institutional environment to be effective so does social or personal capital need a
favourable context The Old Dominion for various reasons did not provide that favourable
context Wellfordrsquos case then offers an example of how his particular entrepreneurial
strategy offers up a short-term success story while at the same time exposing the difficult
context that industrial endeavours faced in the antebellum South
Local factors endemic to Fredericksburg for example played a large role in
amplifying the long-term weakness of relying upon personal rather than physical capital
for Catharine Furnace The most promising regional market Richmond essentially closed
up to Catharine Furnace pig iron by the early 1840s Once Francis Deane left the employ of
the Tredegar Company that firm failed to make massive purchases of Catharine Furnace
iron As the James River and Kanawha Canal linked the ironmakers of the Valley of
Virginia to Richmond moreover Catharine Furnace was further left out of the mix
Without the strong connections to market Wellfordrsquos successors most likely would have
continued to struggle to compete with other more integrated ironmakers In a larger sense
Fredericksburgrsquos entire manufacturing economy was being squeezed out of the picture
during the antebellum period as local boosters failed to make the necessary investments in
the regionrsquos physical infrastructure Geographer Keith Littlefield estimates that the city
lost control over 76 of the trade in its rural hinterland by 1860 as Richmond and
Alexandria expanded their commercial reach at Fredericksburgrsquos expense John
Wellfordrsquos own experience with failed turnpikes river improvements and railroads
during his pre-ironmaking days signalled a failure to secure a variety of market outlets for
Fredericksburgrsquos manufacturers Because Wellfordrsquos furnace produced pig iron ndash a high
bulk and low value commodity ndash shipping costs were a major factor in marketing its
products afar Since the cityrsquos commercial and manufacturing sector served a smaller and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
1348 SP Adams
into force on 2 February 1842 with the final delivery of shot taking place by 31 January
1844 Pending inspection and satisfaction by the Navy Wellford would receive $67200
from the federal government In the spring of 1842 Catharine Furnace obtained shot
patterns from James Walker That summer at least five moulders William H Ferguson
William Pulham R Parker Nicholas Wharton and A Sutherland were hard at work
making 32 lb solid shot from Catharine Furnace iron and in June of 1842 Wellford sent
his first shipment of 5230 shot to Norfolk Naval records indicate that the ordnance officers
at Gosport received over 24000 shot by the end of 1842 Shipments tended to occur fairly
regularly and Catharine Furnace produced an impressive amount of ordnance in a
relatively short period of time as illustrated in Table 1 Assuming that each piece of 32 lb
solid shot actually weighed 32 pounds ndash an assumption that did not always hold true for
nineteenth-century naval ordnance ndash then the estimated value of Wellfordrsquos contract in
1842 alone was roughly $232089621
On the surface Catharine Furnacersquos success with military contracting put the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company on a strong trajectory With the
federal government providing a strong income stream Wellford might have parlayed his
success in ordnance into wider markets for his iron Historians of technology have
provided many examples in which antebellum military enterprise helped reorganise and
refine production techniques in northern government installations like the armouries at
Springfield Massachusetts and Philadelphia as well as with private contractors like
Connecticutrsquos Samuel Colt Virginiarsquos Harpers Ferry Armory exhibited a less than
exemplary record with regard to streamlining the production of muskets and small arms
But in the end even isolated Harpers Ferry entered the modern industrial age So at least
among northern industries military enterprise was in the words of Merritt Roe Smith a
lsquokey ingredient in the evolution of complex technological systemsrsquo and served as a critical
factor in that regionrsquos antebellum industrialisation22
Rather than diversify its production line or markets Catharine Furnacersquos manager
expanded further into the highly volatile ordnance trade Using his personal connections
with the Navy Wellford secured yet another contract for 70000 32 lb solid shot in
February of 1843 The terms of the contract were the same as the 1841 deal although this
time Wellford had less than a year to complete it Since he shipped only about a third of
this amount from Catharine Furnace in 1842 it is questionable whether or not Wellford
expected to produce all of the contracted shot at his own works It was not uncommon for
contractors even if they owned or operated an iron furnace themselves to sub-contract
Table 1 32 lb solid shot shipped to Gosport naval yard from Catharine Furnace 1842
Amount Received Estimated Value ($)
22 June 1842 5250 504000 22 June 1842 2623 251808 18 July 1842 3507 336672 4 August 1842 1692 162432 20 August 1842 2227 213792 8 September 1842 2102 201792 22 September 1842 1401 134496 3 October 1842 1874 179904 3 November 1842 3500 336000 Total 24176 2320896
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1349
production out to other firms at times In fact Wellford notes in his account book that 118
tons of pig iron shipped from the Fredericksburg wharf to Catharine Furnace in 1842 to be
melted into ball in his cupola furnaces Whether or not he had purchased this iron from
other furnaces or recalled it from pig iron meant for sale elsewhere is unclear But a year
later Wellford paid for 55 cartloads or 275 tons of pig iron from the Fredericksburg
wharf back to Catharine Furnace noting that this iron had been sent back from Boston
unsold lsquoon acct of its being so whitersquo and lsquowas therefore worked into ballrsquo23
Producing shot for the Navy secured a solid stream of income for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as a steady demand for iron for the
workers at Catharine Furnace These ordnance contracts required constant vigilance
however as Wellford visited Washington DC on numerous occasions to maintain his
personal connections with the War Department He also paid William Ridgely $8500 lsquofor
arranging accts and settling with [the] Naval Boardrsquo in 1842 Ridgely was a long-time
employee of the Navy who had been the Chief Clerk of the Naval Commissioners until
September of 1842 when he took a new position as Chief Clerk to the Bureau of Navy
Yards and Docks Sporadic payments to Ridgely ranging from $2000 to $10000
continued over the next few years but Wellfordrsquos entries do not give a full account of the
services rendered to him It is likely that Wellfordrsquos various contacts in Washington
provided him with valuable information When he learned that a Baltimore firm had failed
to supply 5000 cannon shot and that inspection officials had rejected 5000 additional units
Wellford wrote to Commodore WM Crane to see if he could provide any information
about securing a contract for himself to make up the 10000 in lost shot to the Navy24
Wellford also tried to squeeze larger profit margins out of the contract by rearranging
one of Catharine Furnacersquos great economic disadvantages ndash its high cost of transportation
The 1843 contract for example had an allowance of $2 per ton from Catharine Furnace to
Fredericksburg and another $1 per ton from Fredericksburg to Gosport In March of 1843
a naval official informed Wellford that lsquoafter reciting the price to be given for the shot
transportation to Fredericksburg and freight that no other allowance is to be madersquo for
shipping shot to Norfolk Whether or not the inspection of the ordnance occurred at
the furnace or at the naval yard was another factor in making contracts profitable Shot
and shell that was rejected at Catharine Furnace could be recast cheaply on the spot
rejected ordnance at Gosport needed to be shipped back to the furnace at the companyrsquos
expense Shipments to Gosport in the summer of 1843 were delayed by late arrival of an
inspection officer to Fredericksburg Some years later Wellford complained to the Navy
that their insistence upon inspections at the yard increased his already prohibitive
transportation costs25
Needless to say Wellford found ordnance a lucrative business for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company By 1843 Wellfordrsquos contracts with the War
Department were providing nearly all of Catharine Furnacersquos income This strategy
carried some risk as Wellford lost out on a contract to provide shot and shell for the Navy
in 1844 This contract went to the Tredegar Company now under the leadership of Joseph
Reid Anderson and making not only basic ordnance like shot and shell but also casting
cannon for the Federal government Like Catharine Furnace Tredegar drew upon strong
personal connections to Washington officials to secure these contracts Eastern Virginiarsquos
iron trade therefore relied almost completely on the federal statersquos demand for ordnance
This dependence proved tenuous when Wellfordrsquos relationship with the Navy soured in
1845 to the point that he was ordered to send back the governmentrsquos shot gauge gauge
plate and cylinders as well as any other instruments for shot inspection26
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1350 SP Adams
Wellford found making shot for the Navy to be a financially rewarding endeavour
even as it carried risks In a memorandum written into his account book he justified a
$344450 commission or 5 on his Navy contract in 1843 for lsquofurnishing the required
security and taking the contract in my name for better or for worsersquo lsquoThis contract I gave
the furnace of the advantage ofrsquo he continued lsquoand I do not hesitate to say that I could
have sold it for a profit of 10 per cent [] I would give that to day for a similar onersquo
Completing the Navyrsquos contract on 32 lb shot he argued in late 1844 kept him lsquo5 days in
the week absent from his familyrsquo and so he considered his personal charge of $122191 on
the yearrsquos receipts to be perfectly reasonable Wellford had reason to value his experience
with the Navy as he received $3226320 worth of contracts in the 1844 ndash45 fiscal year to
provide shot and shell for the Navyrsquos land-based fortifications These contracts accounted
for 272 of the Navyrsquos expenditure for this purpose and it made Wellford the single
largest naval ordnance contractor in the nation Losing this lucrative stream of income hurt
the future financial prospects of Catharine Furnace27
Rather than dwell on the failures with the Navy Wellford jumped into the manufacture
of 8 and 10 inch artillery shells and 12 and 24 lb solid shot for the US Army by signing a
$2442827 contract in 1844 He also upped his own commission to 10 arguing again
that he was remaining personally responsible for the contract lsquoThis contract I gave the
Furnace the advantage ofrsquo he argued in defence of his $241697 from the companyrsquos
account Rather than sub-contract out the work to other ironworks Wellford reminded his
partners that he planned to keep all of the Army business at Catharine Furnace He did not
lsquohesitate to say I could have sold it for a much larger advancersquo for his own personal profit
In the summer of 1844 Wellford rushed shell patterns from an armoury in Washington
and after receiving guidance from ordnance officer Colonel George Talcott was shipping
shot and shells to Fort Monroe For this job Wellford secured a favourable rate of 4 cents
for 10 inch shells 5 cents for 8 inch shells and 314 cents for 12 and 24 lb solid shot
Although the initial contract was for a little under $25000 Wellford continued to make
shot and shell for the Army well into 1846 by signing several small contracts in 1845 and a
large $1244469 order in 1846 Since Wellford upped his commission to 15 for that later
work he clearly felt that his personal stake in the army contracts merited a larger share of
the companyrsquos profits28
John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal fortunes with Catharine Furnace had finally
seemed to turn the corner By 1846 he had acquired a controlling interest in the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company by purchasing more shares in the
corporation bringing ownership stake to three-fifths Charles Dyer of Providence
moreover had recently concluded that lsquothis is as good if not the best market in the country
to dispose of all he has or may in future makersquo for Catharine Furnace pig iron Wellford
had 150 to 200 tons of pig iron on hand at the Fredericksburg wharf ready to ship out to the
Northeast Although the prospects of many Virginia charcoal iron furnaces seemed to be
on the decline in the face of Pennsylvaniarsquos anthracite ironmakers Wellfordrsquos connections
with the War Department and the suggestion of a niche market for Catharine Furnacersquos
lsquogray ironrsquo in Providence offered a glimpse of hope in late 184629
Following the outbreak of the War with Mexico Navy officials approached Wellford
about a new contract for shot and shell On 3 September 1846 the head of the Navyrsquos
Bureau of Ordnance Commodore Louis Warrington praised Wellfordrsquos past service and
in light of a shortage of shot and shell offered Wellford the opportunity to provide 10000
units of solid 32 lb shot and 7000 shells for 32 lb cannons for the Navy Wellford
responded in the positive as Commodore Warrington sent out a contract in October or
November of 1846 for his signature However Wellford never signed the contract and in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1351
late December of 1846 the residents of Fredericksburg were startled to discover that John
Spotswood Wellford the driving force behind so many social economic and political
movements in Spotsylvania County had died at the moment when Catharine Furnace
seemed on the brink of big success30
In the wake of Johnrsquos death the future direction of Catharine Furnace was in doubt
Edward Carmichael now living in Richmond attempted to assume control over Wellfordrsquos
Navy contract for 10000 32 lb shot and 7000 shells in early January 1847 As William
Wellford stalled in settling his fatherrsquos estate Carmichael argued that the Navy should
transfer the Catharine Furnace work to his authority Carmichael also undertook some
contracts to supply Army ordnance that he expected to be filled with Catharine Furnace
iron He immediately wrote to Fredericksburg asking for two or three pigs of lsquothe very best
Gray ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace to be sent to Richmond immediately so that he could
complete this contract at local forges In early February a lsquofearfulrsquo Carmichael advised
William to ship any remaining shot and shell on the Catharine Furnace grounds to Norfolk
by mid-March so as to fulfil any obligations he had to the Navy By late February William
had taken inventory of the remaining ordnance stock at Catharine Furnace and agreed to
ship the shot and shell on hand for the Army and to lsquomould the 24 lb Solid Shot and the 32
lb Sold Shot for the Navy with one workman on eachrsquo through mid-March The completion
of this final contract would be the last bit of ordnance manufacture done at Catharine
Furnace during the 1840s as William Wellford made clear in his correspondence that he
had no interest in pursuing the business further31
With John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos death then Catharine Furnacersquos future was in doubt
William Wellford Johnrsquos son became the de facto manager at the furnace although he
seemed to be a reluctant heir to this position William wrote to Edward Carmichael in early
1847 that lsquoI can by no means accept the execution of the Navy contractrsquo and that it
lsquoappears to be equally illegal for you and Mr C acting as surviving partners to undertake
itrsquo Because the Army and Navy contracted with individuals and not corporations John
Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal estate ndash not the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company ndash were the only ones authorised to complete any remaining
work Indeed the firmrsquos attorney had recently advised that William was only authorised to
continue Catharine Furnacersquos operations lsquofor the purpose of completing the execution of
any contracts which may have been entered into but not fully executed by his testator at
the time of his deathrsquo and that lsquoAt the death of Mr Wellford the partnership which existed
between himself amp others in the iron works ceased except for the purpose of completing
existing engagements and winding up the businessrsquo Only a few weeks later the trustee of
Francis Deanersquos share in the firm Richard H Cunningham announced that after several
meetings with William Wellford it was clear that he lsquohad no desire or intention of
purchasing the propertyrsquo and that the best course of action would be to liquidate the
physical assets of the corporation and ask $40000 for the lsquoEstate Fixtures and Mules (not
including any Pig Iron)rsquo By early April Fredericksburgrsquos Democratic Recorder
advertised the a June sale at auction of lsquoThe Catharine Furnace with Dwelling 4648 acres
of land containing iron ore well wooded fixtures patterns stock steam engine house
cupolas blacksmithrsquos tools ampc ampc with everything requisite for a complete iron
manufacturing establishmentrsquo32
Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
Was Catharine Furnace successful This is a difficult question to address without
understanding the early context in which the firm operated as well as its utter dependence
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1352 SP Adams
upon the personal capital of John Spotswood Wellford The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company struggled to find a reliable outlet for the products of Catharine
Furnace during its early history Local state and national trends created an unfavourable
atmosphere for starting an iron smelting operation during the late 1830s and early 1840s
John Wellford would have been well aware of his disadvantages in this regard As a longshy
time Fredericksburg resident with first-hand familiarity of the grandiose visions false
starts and frustrating stalls of local projects such as the Rappahannock Navigation
Company or the Fredericksburg and Potomac Creek Railroad Company Wellford
followed his entrepreneurial instincts into less traditional markets for ironmakers Rather
than wait for Fredericksburgrsquos prospects to magically reverse or dump his own financial
resources into a new improvement or manufacturing investment Wellford used his long
history of political and economic contacts to his firmrsquos advantage Military contracts
shifted the responsibility of success or failure into an entirely new area of risk ndash
Wellfordrsquos ability to maintain his contacts in the Navy and War departments and to spin
them into lucrative contracts for the production of shot and shell In the short term the
firmrsquos reliance upon government contracts saved Catharine Furnace and made the
operation profitable
In the long run though the dependency on John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal capital
bound the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company to its
owner and manager This was not the sort of social capital that could transfer easily to either
Johnrsquos family or his fellow incorporators In the end it was not Wellfordrsquos lack of
entrepreneurial talent that limited Catharine Furnacersquos long-term prospects but perhaps his
creative way of overcoming the various obstacles to profitable ironmaking that existed in
antebellum Virginia But just as traditional forms of financial capital need a strong
institutional environment to be effective so does social or personal capital need a
favourable context The Old Dominion for various reasons did not provide that favourable
context Wellfordrsquos case then offers an example of how his particular entrepreneurial
strategy offers up a short-term success story while at the same time exposing the difficult
context that industrial endeavours faced in the antebellum South
Local factors endemic to Fredericksburg for example played a large role in
amplifying the long-term weakness of relying upon personal rather than physical capital
for Catharine Furnace The most promising regional market Richmond essentially closed
up to Catharine Furnace pig iron by the early 1840s Once Francis Deane left the employ of
the Tredegar Company that firm failed to make massive purchases of Catharine Furnace
iron As the James River and Kanawha Canal linked the ironmakers of the Valley of
Virginia to Richmond moreover Catharine Furnace was further left out of the mix
Without the strong connections to market Wellfordrsquos successors most likely would have
continued to struggle to compete with other more integrated ironmakers In a larger sense
Fredericksburgrsquos entire manufacturing economy was being squeezed out of the picture
during the antebellum period as local boosters failed to make the necessary investments in
the regionrsquos physical infrastructure Geographer Keith Littlefield estimates that the city
lost control over 76 of the trade in its rural hinterland by 1860 as Richmond and
Alexandria expanded their commercial reach at Fredericksburgrsquos expense John
Wellfordrsquos own experience with failed turnpikes river improvements and railroads
during his pre-ironmaking days signalled a failure to secure a variety of market outlets for
Fredericksburgrsquos manufacturers Because Wellfordrsquos furnace produced pig iron ndash a high
bulk and low value commodity ndash shipping costs were a major factor in marketing its
products afar Since the cityrsquos commercial and manufacturing sector served a smaller and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
Business History 1349
production out to other firms at times In fact Wellford notes in his account book that 118
tons of pig iron shipped from the Fredericksburg wharf to Catharine Furnace in 1842 to be
melted into ball in his cupola furnaces Whether or not he had purchased this iron from
other furnaces or recalled it from pig iron meant for sale elsewhere is unclear But a year
later Wellford paid for 55 cartloads or 275 tons of pig iron from the Fredericksburg
wharf back to Catharine Furnace noting that this iron had been sent back from Boston
unsold lsquoon acct of its being so whitersquo and lsquowas therefore worked into ballrsquo23
Producing shot for the Navy secured a solid stream of income for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company as well as a steady demand for iron for the
workers at Catharine Furnace These ordnance contracts required constant vigilance
however as Wellford visited Washington DC on numerous occasions to maintain his
personal connections with the War Department He also paid William Ridgely $8500 lsquofor
arranging accts and settling with [the] Naval Boardrsquo in 1842 Ridgely was a long-time
employee of the Navy who had been the Chief Clerk of the Naval Commissioners until
September of 1842 when he took a new position as Chief Clerk to the Bureau of Navy
Yards and Docks Sporadic payments to Ridgely ranging from $2000 to $10000
continued over the next few years but Wellfordrsquos entries do not give a full account of the
services rendered to him It is likely that Wellfordrsquos various contacts in Washington
provided him with valuable information When he learned that a Baltimore firm had failed
to supply 5000 cannon shot and that inspection officials had rejected 5000 additional units
Wellford wrote to Commodore WM Crane to see if he could provide any information
about securing a contract for himself to make up the 10000 in lost shot to the Navy24
Wellford also tried to squeeze larger profit margins out of the contract by rearranging
one of Catharine Furnacersquos great economic disadvantages ndash its high cost of transportation
The 1843 contract for example had an allowance of $2 per ton from Catharine Furnace to
Fredericksburg and another $1 per ton from Fredericksburg to Gosport In March of 1843
a naval official informed Wellford that lsquoafter reciting the price to be given for the shot
transportation to Fredericksburg and freight that no other allowance is to be madersquo for
shipping shot to Norfolk Whether or not the inspection of the ordnance occurred at
the furnace or at the naval yard was another factor in making contracts profitable Shot
and shell that was rejected at Catharine Furnace could be recast cheaply on the spot
rejected ordnance at Gosport needed to be shipped back to the furnace at the companyrsquos
expense Shipments to Gosport in the summer of 1843 were delayed by late arrival of an
inspection officer to Fredericksburg Some years later Wellford complained to the Navy
that their insistence upon inspections at the yard increased his already prohibitive
transportation costs25
Needless to say Wellford found ordnance a lucrative business for the Fredericksburg
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company By 1843 Wellfordrsquos contracts with the War
Department were providing nearly all of Catharine Furnacersquos income This strategy
carried some risk as Wellford lost out on a contract to provide shot and shell for the Navy
in 1844 This contract went to the Tredegar Company now under the leadership of Joseph
Reid Anderson and making not only basic ordnance like shot and shell but also casting
cannon for the Federal government Like Catharine Furnace Tredegar drew upon strong
personal connections to Washington officials to secure these contracts Eastern Virginiarsquos
iron trade therefore relied almost completely on the federal statersquos demand for ordnance
This dependence proved tenuous when Wellfordrsquos relationship with the Navy soured in
1845 to the point that he was ordered to send back the governmentrsquos shot gauge gauge
plate and cylinders as well as any other instruments for shot inspection26
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1350 SP Adams
Wellford found making shot for the Navy to be a financially rewarding endeavour
even as it carried risks In a memorandum written into his account book he justified a
$344450 commission or 5 on his Navy contract in 1843 for lsquofurnishing the required
security and taking the contract in my name for better or for worsersquo lsquoThis contract I gave
the furnace of the advantage ofrsquo he continued lsquoand I do not hesitate to say that I could
have sold it for a profit of 10 per cent [] I would give that to day for a similar onersquo
Completing the Navyrsquos contract on 32 lb shot he argued in late 1844 kept him lsquo5 days in
the week absent from his familyrsquo and so he considered his personal charge of $122191 on
the yearrsquos receipts to be perfectly reasonable Wellford had reason to value his experience
with the Navy as he received $3226320 worth of contracts in the 1844 ndash45 fiscal year to
provide shot and shell for the Navyrsquos land-based fortifications These contracts accounted
for 272 of the Navyrsquos expenditure for this purpose and it made Wellford the single
largest naval ordnance contractor in the nation Losing this lucrative stream of income hurt
the future financial prospects of Catharine Furnace27
Rather than dwell on the failures with the Navy Wellford jumped into the manufacture
of 8 and 10 inch artillery shells and 12 and 24 lb solid shot for the US Army by signing a
$2442827 contract in 1844 He also upped his own commission to 10 arguing again
that he was remaining personally responsible for the contract lsquoThis contract I gave the
Furnace the advantage ofrsquo he argued in defence of his $241697 from the companyrsquos
account Rather than sub-contract out the work to other ironworks Wellford reminded his
partners that he planned to keep all of the Army business at Catharine Furnace He did not
lsquohesitate to say I could have sold it for a much larger advancersquo for his own personal profit
In the summer of 1844 Wellford rushed shell patterns from an armoury in Washington
and after receiving guidance from ordnance officer Colonel George Talcott was shipping
shot and shells to Fort Monroe For this job Wellford secured a favourable rate of 4 cents
for 10 inch shells 5 cents for 8 inch shells and 314 cents for 12 and 24 lb solid shot
Although the initial contract was for a little under $25000 Wellford continued to make
shot and shell for the Army well into 1846 by signing several small contracts in 1845 and a
large $1244469 order in 1846 Since Wellford upped his commission to 15 for that later
work he clearly felt that his personal stake in the army contracts merited a larger share of
the companyrsquos profits28
John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal fortunes with Catharine Furnace had finally
seemed to turn the corner By 1846 he had acquired a controlling interest in the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company by purchasing more shares in the
corporation bringing ownership stake to three-fifths Charles Dyer of Providence
moreover had recently concluded that lsquothis is as good if not the best market in the country
to dispose of all he has or may in future makersquo for Catharine Furnace pig iron Wellford
had 150 to 200 tons of pig iron on hand at the Fredericksburg wharf ready to ship out to the
Northeast Although the prospects of many Virginia charcoal iron furnaces seemed to be
on the decline in the face of Pennsylvaniarsquos anthracite ironmakers Wellfordrsquos connections
with the War Department and the suggestion of a niche market for Catharine Furnacersquos
lsquogray ironrsquo in Providence offered a glimpse of hope in late 184629
Following the outbreak of the War with Mexico Navy officials approached Wellford
about a new contract for shot and shell On 3 September 1846 the head of the Navyrsquos
Bureau of Ordnance Commodore Louis Warrington praised Wellfordrsquos past service and
in light of a shortage of shot and shell offered Wellford the opportunity to provide 10000
units of solid 32 lb shot and 7000 shells for 32 lb cannons for the Navy Wellford
responded in the positive as Commodore Warrington sent out a contract in October or
November of 1846 for his signature However Wellford never signed the contract and in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1351
late December of 1846 the residents of Fredericksburg were startled to discover that John
Spotswood Wellford the driving force behind so many social economic and political
movements in Spotsylvania County had died at the moment when Catharine Furnace
seemed on the brink of big success30
In the wake of Johnrsquos death the future direction of Catharine Furnace was in doubt
Edward Carmichael now living in Richmond attempted to assume control over Wellfordrsquos
Navy contract for 10000 32 lb shot and 7000 shells in early January 1847 As William
Wellford stalled in settling his fatherrsquos estate Carmichael argued that the Navy should
transfer the Catharine Furnace work to his authority Carmichael also undertook some
contracts to supply Army ordnance that he expected to be filled with Catharine Furnace
iron He immediately wrote to Fredericksburg asking for two or three pigs of lsquothe very best
Gray ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace to be sent to Richmond immediately so that he could
complete this contract at local forges In early February a lsquofearfulrsquo Carmichael advised
William to ship any remaining shot and shell on the Catharine Furnace grounds to Norfolk
by mid-March so as to fulfil any obligations he had to the Navy By late February William
had taken inventory of the remaining ordnance stock at Catharine Furnace and agreed to
ship the shot and shell on hand for the Army and to lsquomould the 24 lb Solid Shot and the 32
lb Sold Shot for the Navy with one workman on eachrsquo through mid-March The completion
of this final contract would be the last bit of ordnance manufacture done at Catharine
Furnace during the 1840s as William Wellford made clear in his correspondence that he
had no interest in pursuing the business further31
With John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos death then Catharine Furnacersquos future was in doubt
William Wellford Johnrsquos son became the de facto manager at the furnace although he
seemed to be a reluctant heir to this position William wrote to Edward Carmichael in early
1847 that lsquoI can by no means accept the execution of the Navy contractrsquo and that it
lsquoappears to be equally illegal for you and Mr C acting as surviving partners to undertake
itrsquo Because the Army and Navy contracted with individuals and not corporations John
Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal estate ndash not the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company ndash were the only ones authorised to complete any remaining
work Indeed the firmrsquos attorney had recently advised that William was only authorised to
continue Catharine Furnacersquos operations lsquofor the purpose of completing the execution of
any contracts which may have been entered into but not fully executed by his testator at
the time of his deathrsquo and that lsquoAt the death of Mr Wellford the partnership which existed
between himself amp others in the iron works ceased except for the purpose of completing
existing engagements and winding up the businessrsquo Only a few weeks later the trustee of
Francis Deanersquos share in the firm Richard H Cunningham announced that after several
meetings with William Wellford it was clear that he lsquohad no desire or intention of
purchasing the propertyrsquo and that the best course of action would be to liquidate the
physical assets of the corporation and ask $40000 for the lsquoEstate Fixtures and Mules (not
including any Pig Iron)rsquo By early April Fredericksburgrsquos Democratic Recorder
advertised the a June sale at auction of lsquoThe Catharine Furnace with Dwelling 4648 acres
of land containing iron ore well wooded fixtures patterns stock steam engine house
cupolas blacksmithrsquos tools ampc ampc with everything requisite for a complete iron
manufacturing establishmentrsquo32
Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
Was Catharine Furnace successful This is a difficult question to address without
understanding the early context in which the firm operated as well as its utter dependence
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1352 SP Adams
upon the personal capital of John Spotswood Wellford The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company struggled to find a reliable outlet for the products of Catharine
Furnace during its early history Local state and national trends created an unfavourable
atmosphere for starting an iron smelting operation during the late 1830s and early 1840s
John Wellford would have been well aware of his disadvantages in this regard As a longshy
time Fredericksburg resident with first-hand familiarity of the grandiose visions false
starts and frustrating stalls of local projects such as the Rappahannock Navigation
Company or the Fredericksburg and Potomac Creek Railroad Company Wellford
followed his entrepreneurial instincts into less traditional markets for ironmakers Rather
than wait for Fredericksburgrsquos prospects to magically reverse or dump his own financial
resources into a new improvement or manufacturing investment Wellford used his long
history of political and economic contacts to his firmrsquos advantage Military contracts
shifted the responsibility of success or failure into an entirely new area of risk ndash
Wellfordrsquos ability to maintain his contacts in the Navy and War departments and to spin
them into lucrative contracts for the production of shot and shell In the short term the
firmrsquos reliance upon government contracts saved Catharine Furnace and made the
operation profitable
In the long run though the dependency on John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal capital
bound the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company to its
owner and manager This was not the sort of social capital that could transfer easily to either
Johnrsquos family or his fellow incorporators In the end it was not Wellfordrsquos lack of
entrepreneurial talent that limited Catharine Furnacersquos long-term prospects but perhaps his
creative way of overcoming the various obstacles to profitable ironmaking that existed in
antebellum Virginia But just as traditional forms of financial capital need a strong
institutional environment to be effective so does social or personal capital need a
favourable context The Old Dominion for various reasons did not provide that favourable
context Wellfordrsquos case then offers an example of how his particular entrepreneurial
strategy offers up a short-term success story while at the same time exposing the difficult
context that industrial endeavours faced in the antebellum South
Local factors endemic to Fredericksburg for example played a large role in
amplifying the long-term weakness of relying upon personal rather than physical capital
for Catharine Furnace The most promising regional market Richmond essentially closed
up to Catharine Furnace pig iron by the early 1840s Once Francis Deane left the employ of
the Tredegar Company that firm failed to make massive purchases of Catharine Furnace
iron As the James River and Kanawha Canal linked the ironmakers of the Valley of
Virginia to Richmond moreover Catharine Furnace was further left out of the mix
Without the strong connections to market Wellfordrsquos successors most likely would have
continued to struggle to compete with other more integrated ironmakers In a larger sense
Fredericksburgrsquos entire manufacturing economy was being squeezed out of the picture
during the antebellum period as local boosters failed to make the necessary investments in
the regionrsquos physical infrastructure Geographer Keith Littlefield estimates that the city
lost control over 76 of the trade in its rural hinterland by 1860 as Richmond and
Alexandria expanded their commercial reach at Fredericksburgrsquos expense John
Wellfordrsquos own experience with failed turnpikes river improvements and railroads
during his pre-ironmaking days signalled a failure to secure a variety of market outlets for
Fredericksburgrsquos manufacturers Because Wellfordrsquos furnace produced pig iron ndash a high
bulk and low value commodity ndash shipping costs were a major factor in marketing its
products afar Since the cityrsquos commercial and manufacturing sector served a smaller and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
1350 SP Adams
Wellford found making shot for the Navy to be a financially rewarding endeavour
even as it carried risks In a memorandum written into his account book he justified a
$344450 commission or 5 on his Navy contract in 1843 for lsquofurnishing the required
security and taking the contract in my name for better or for worsersquo lsquoThis contract I gave
the furnace of the advantage ofrsquo he continued lsquoand I do not hesitate to say that I could
have sold it for a profit of 10 per cent [] I would give that to day for a similar onersquo
Completing the Navyrsquos contract on 32 lb shot he argued in late 1844 kept him lsquo5 days in
the week absent from his familyrsquo and so he considered his personal charge of $122191 on
the yearrsquos receipts to be perfectly reasonable Wellford had reason to value his experience
with the Navy as he received $3226320 worth of contracts in the 1844 ndash45 fiscal year to
provide shot and shell for the Navyrsquos land-based fortifications These contracts accounted
for 272 of the Navyrsquos expenditure for this purpose and it made Wellford the single
largest naval ordnance contractor in the nation Losing this lucrative stream of income hurt
the future financial prospects of Catharine Furnace27
Rather than dwell on the failures with the Navy Wellford jumped into the manufacture
of 8 and 10 inch artillery shells and 12 and 24 lb solid shot for the US Army by signing a
$2442827 contract in 1844 He also upped his own commission to 10 arguing again
that he was remaining personally responsible for the contract lsquoThis contract I gave the
Furnace the advantage ofrsquo he argued in defence of his $241697 from the companyrsquos
account Rather than sub-contract out the work to other ironworks Wellford reminded his
partners that he planned to keep all of the Army business at Catharine Furnace He did not
lsquohesitate to say I could have sold it for a much larger advancersquo for his own personal profit
In the summer of 1844 Wellford rushed shell patterns from an armoury in Washington
and after receiving guidance from ordnance officer Colonel George Talcott was shipping
shot and shells to Fort Monroe For this job Wellford secured a favourable rate of 4 cents
for 10 inch shells 5 cents for 8 inch shells and 314 cents for 12 and 24 lb solid shot
Although the initial contract was for a little under $25000 Wellford continued to make
shot and shell for the Army well into 1846 by signing several small contracts in 1845 and a
large $1244469 order in 1846 Since Wellford upped his commission to 15 for that later
work he clearly felt that his personal stake in the army contracts merited a larger share of
the companyrsquos profits28
John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal fortunes with Catharine Furnace had finally
seemed to turn the corner By 1846 he had acquired a controlling interest in the
Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company by purchasing more shares in the
corporation bringing ownership stake to three-fifths Charles Dyer of Providence
moreover had recently concluded that lsquothis is as good if not the best market in the country
to dispose of all he has or may in future makersquo for Catharine Furnace pig iron Wellford
had 150 to 200 tons of pig iron on hand at the Fredericksburg wharf ready to ship out to the
Northeast Although the prospects of many Virginia charcoal iron furnaces seemed to be
on the decline in the face of Pennsylvaniarsquos anthracite ironmakers Wellfordrsquos connections
with the War Department and the suggestion of a niche market for Catharine Furnacersquos
lsquogray ironrsquo in Providence offered a glimpse of hope in late 184629
Following the outbreak of the War with Mexico Navy officials approached Wellford
about a new contract for shot and shell On 3 September 1846 the head of the Navyrsquos
Bureau of Ordnance Commodore Louis Warrington praised Wellfordrsquos past service and
in light of a shortage of shot and shell offered Wellford the opportunity to provide 10000
units of solid 32 lb shot and 7000 shells for 32 lb cannons for the Navy Wellford
responded in the positive as Commodore Warrington sent out a contract in October or
November of 1846 for his signature However Wellford never signed the contract and in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1351
late December of 1846 the residents of Fredericksburg were startled to discover that John
Spotswood Wellford the driving force behind so many social economic and political
movements in Spotsylvania County had died at the moment when Catharine Furnace
seemed on the brink of big success30
In the wake of Johnrsquos death the future direction of Catharine Furnace was in doubt
Edward Carmichael now living in Richmond attempted to assume control over Wellfordrsquos
Navy contract for 10000 32 lb shot and 7000 shells in early January 1847 As William
Wellford stalled in settling his fatherrsquos estate Carmichael argued that the Navy should
transfer the Catharine Furnace work to his authority Carmichael also undertook some
contracts to supply Army ordnance that he expected to be filled with Catharine Furnace
iron He immediately wrote to Fredericksburg asking for two or three pigs of lsquothe very best
Gray ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace to be sent to Richmond immediately so that he could
complete this contract at local forges In early February a lsquofearfulrsquo Carmichael advised
William to ship any remaining shot and shell on the Catharine Furnace grounds to Norfolk
by mid-March so as to fulfil any obligations he had to the Navy By late February William
had taken inventory of the remaining ordnance stock at Catharine Furnace and agreed to
ship the shot and shell on hand for the Army and to lsquomould the 24 lb Solid Shot and the 32
lb Sold Shot for the Navy with one workman on eachrsquo through mid-March The completion
of this final contract would be the last bit of ordnance manufacture done at Catharine
Furnace during the 1840s as William Wellford made clear in his correspondence that he
had no interest in pursuing the business further31
With John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos death then Catharine Furnacersquos future was in doubt
William Wellford Johnrsquos son became the de facto manager at the furnace although he
seemed to be a reluctant heir to this position William wrote to Edward Carmichael in early
1847 that lsquoI can by no means accept the execution of the Navy contractrsquo and that it
lsquoappears to be equally illegal for you and Mr C acting as surviving partners to undertake
itrsquo Because the Army and Navy contracted with individuals and not corporations John
Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal estate ndash not the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company ndash were the only ones authorised to complete any remaining
work Indeed the firmrsquos attorney had recently advised that William was only authorised to
continue Catharine Furnacersquos operations lsquofor the purpose of completing the execution of
any contracts which may have been entered into but not fully executed by his testator at
the time of his deathrsquo and that lsquoAt the death of Mr Wellford the partnership which existed
between himself amp others in the iron works ceased except for the purpose of completing
existing engagements and winding up the businessrsquo Only a few weeks later the trustee of
Francis Deanersquos share in the firm Richard H Cunningham announced that after several
meetings with William Wellford it was clear that he lsquohad no desire or intention of
purchasing the propertyrsquo and that the best course of action would be to liquidate the
physical assets of the corporation and ask $40000 for the lsquoEstate Fixtures and Mules (not
including any Pig Iron)rsquo By early April Fredericksburgrsquos Democratic Recorder
advertised the a June sale at auction of lsquoThe Catharine Furnace with Dwelling 4648 acres
of land containing iron ore well wooded fixtures patterns stock steam engine house
cupolas blacksmithrsquos tools ampc ampc with everything requisite for a complete iron
manufacturing establishmentrsquo32
Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
Was Catharine Furnace successful This is a difficult question to address without
understanding the early context in which the firm operated as well as its utter dependence
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1352 SP Adams
upon the personal capital of John Spotswood Wellford The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company struggled to find a reliable outlet for the products of Catharine
Furnace during its early history Local state and national trends created an unfavourable
atmosphere for starting an iron smelting operation during the late 1830s and early 1840s
John Wellford would have been well aware of his disadvantages in this regard As a longshy
time Fredericksburg resident with first-hand familiarity of the grandiose visions false
starts and frustrating stalls of local projects such as the Rappahannock Navigation
Company or the Fredericksburg and Potomac Creek Railroad Company Wellford
followed his entrepreneurial instincts into less traditional markets for ironmakers Rather
than wait for Fredericksburgrsquos prospects to magically reverse or dump his own financial
resources into a new improvement or manufacturing investment Wellford used his long
history of political and economic contacts to his firmrsquos advantage Military contracts
shifted the responsibility of success or failure into an entirely new area of risk ndash
Wellfordrsquos ability to maintain his contacts in the Navy and War departments and to spin
them into lucrative contracts for the production of shot and shell In the short term the
firmrsquos reliance upon government contracts saved Catharine Furnace and made the
operation profitable
In the long run though the dependency on John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal capital
bound the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company to its
owner and manager This was not the sort of social capital that could transfer easily to either
Johnrsquos family or his fellow incorporators In the end it was not Wellfordrsquos lack of
entrepreneurial talent that limited Catharine Furnacersquos long-term prospects but perhaps his
creative way of overcoming the various obstacles to profitable ironmaking that existed in
antebellum Virginia But just as traditional forms of financial capital need a strong
institutional environment to be effective so does social or personal capital need a
favourable context The Old Dominion for various reasons did not provide that favourable
context Wellfordrsquos case then offers an example of how his particular entrepreneurial
strategy offers up a short-term success story while at the same time exposing the difficult
context that industrial endeavours faced in the antebellum South
Local factors endemic to Fredericksburg for example played a large role in
amplifying the long-term weakness of relying upon personal rather than physical capital
for Catharine Furnace The most promising regional market Richmond essentially closed
up to Catharine Furnace pig iron by the early 1840s Once Francis Deane left the employ of
the Tredegar Company that firm failed to make massive purchases of Catharine Furnace
iron As the James River and Kanawha Canal linked the ironmakers of the Valley of
Virginia to Richmond moreover Catharine Furnace was further left out of the mix
Without the strong connections to market Wellfordrsquos successors most likely would have
continued to struggle to compete with other more integrated ironmakers In a larger sense
Fredericksburgrsquos entire manufacturing economy was being squeezed out of the picture
during the antebellum period as local boosters failed to make the necessary investments in
the regionrsquos physical infrastructure Geographer Keith Littlefield estimates that the city
lost control over 76 of the trade in its rural hinterland by 1860 as Richmond and
Alexandria expanded their commercial reach at Fredericksburgrsquos expense John
Wellfordrsquos own experience with failed turnpikes river improvements and railroads
during his pre-ironmaking days signalled a failure to secure a variety of market outlets for
Fredericksburgrsquos manufacturers Because Wellfordrsquos furnace produced pig iron ndash a high
bulk and low value commodity ndash shipping costs were a major factor in marketing its
products afar Since the cityrsquos commercial and manufacturing sector served a smaller and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
Business History 1351
late December of 1846 the residents of Fredericksburg were startled to discover that John
Spotswood Wellford the driving force behind so many social economic and political
movements in Spotsylvania County had died at the moment when Catharine Furnace
seemed on the brink of big success30
In the wake of Johnrsquos death the future direction of Catharine Furnace was in doubt
Edward Carmichael now living in Richmond attempted to assume control over Wellfordrsquos
Navy contract for 10000 32 lb shot and 7000 shells in early January 1847 As William
Wellford stalled in settling his fatherrsquos estate Carmichael argued that the Navy should
transfer the Catharine Furnace work to his authority Carmichael also undertook some
contracts to supply Army ordnance that he expected to be filled with Catharine Furnace
iron He immediately wrote to Fredericksburg asking for two or three pigs of lsquothe very best
Gray ironrsquo from Catharine Furnace to be sent to Richmond immediately so that he could
complete this contract at local forges In early February a lsquofearfulrsquo Carmichael advised
William to ship any remaining shot and shell on the Catharine Furnace grounds to Norfolk
by mid-March so as to fulfil any obligations he had to the Navy By late February William
had taken inventory of the remaining ordnance stock at Catharine Furnace and agreed to
ship the shot and shell on hand for the Army and to lsquomould the 24 lb Solid Shot and the 32
lb Sold Shot for the Navy with one workman on eachrsquo through mid-March The completion
of this final contract would be the last bit of ordnance manufacture done at Catharine
Furnace during the 1840s as William Wellford made clear in his correspondence that he
had no interest in pursuing the business further31
With John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos death then Catharine Furnacersquos future was in doubt
William Wellford Johnrsquos son became the de facto manager at the furnace although he
seemed to be a reluctant heir to this position William wrote to Edward Carmichael in early
1847 that lsquoI can by no means accept the execution of the Navy contractrsquo and that it
lsquoappears to be equally illegal for you and Mr C acting as surviving partners to undertake
itrsquo Because the Army and Navy contracted with individuals and not corporations John
Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal estate ndash not the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company ndash were the only ones authorised to complete any remaining
work Indeed the firmrsquos attorney had recently advised that William was only authorised to
continue Catharine Furnacersquos operations lsquofor the purpose of completing the execution of
any contracts which may have been entered into but not fully executed by his testator at
the time of his deathrsquo and that lsquoAt the death of Mr Wellford the partnership which existed
between himself amp others in the iron works ceased except for the purpose of completing
existing engagements and winding up the businessrsquo Only a few weeks later the trustee of
Francis Deanersquos share in the firm Richard H Cunningham announced that after several
meetings with William Wellford it was clear that he lsquohad no desire or intention of
purchasing the propertyrsquo and that the best course of action would be to liquidate the
physical assets of the corporation and ask $40000 for the lsquoEstate Fixtures and Mules (not
including any Pig Iron)rsquo By early April Fredericksburgrsquos Democratic Recorder
advertised the a June sale at auction of lsquoThe Catharine Furnace with Dwelling 4648 acres
of land containing iron ore well wooded fixtures patterns stock steam engine house
cupolas blacksmithrsquos tools ampc ampc with everything requisite for a complete iron
manufacturing establishmentrsquo32
Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
Was Catharine Furnace successful This is a difficult question to address without
understanding the early context in which the firm operated as well as its utter dependence
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1352 SP Adams
upon the personal capital of John Spotswood Wellford The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company struggled to find a reliable outlet for the products of Catharine
Furnace during its early history Local state and national trends created an unfavourable
atmosphere for starting an iron smelting operation during the late 1830s and early 1840s
John Wellford would have been well aware of his disadvantages in this regard As a longshy
time Fredericksburg resident with first-hand familiarity of the grandiose visions false
starts and frustrating stalls of local projects such as the Rappahannock Navigation
Company or the Fredericksburg and Potomac Creek Railroad Company Wellford
followed his entrepreneurial instincts into less traditional markets for ironmakers Rather
than wait for Fredericksburgrsquos prospects to magically reverse or dump his own financial
resources into a new improvement or manufacturing investment Wellford used his long
history of political and economic contacts to his firmrsquos advantage Military contracts
shifted the responsibility of success or failure into an entirely new area of risk ndash
Wellfordrsquos ability to maintain his contacts in the Navy and War departments and to spin
them into lucrative contracts for the production of shot and shell In the short term the
firmrsquos reliance upon government contracts saved Catharine Furnace and made the
operation profitable
In the long run though the dependency on John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal capital
bound the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company to its
owner and manager This was not the sort of social capital that could transfer easily to either
Johnrsquos family or his fellow incorporators In the end it was not Wellfordrsquos lack of
entrepreneurial talent that limited Catharine Furnacersquos long-term prospects but perhaps his
creative way of overcoming the various obstacles to profitable ironmaking that existed in
antebellum Virginia But just as traditional forms of financial capital need a strong
institutional environment to be effective so does social or personal capital need a
favourable context The Old Dominion for various reasons did not provide that favourable
context Wellfordrsquos case then offers an example of how his particular entrepreneurial
strategy offers up a short-term success story while at the same time exposing the difficult
context that industrial endeavours faced in the antebellum South
Local factors endemic to Fredericksburg for example played a large role in
amplifying the long-term weakness of relying upon personal rather than physical capital
for Catharine Furnace The most promising regional market Richmond essentially closed
up to Catharine Furnace pig iron by the early 1840s Once Francis Deane left the employ of
the Tredegar Company that firm failed to make massive purchases of Catharine Furnace
iron As the James River and Kanawha Canal linked the ironmakers of the Valley of
Virginia to Richmond moreover Catharine Furnace was further left out of the mix
Without the strong connections to market Wellfordrsquos successors most likely would have
continued to struggle to compete with other more integrated ironmakers In a larger sense
Fredericksburgrsquos entire manufacturing economy was being squeezed out of the picture
during the antebellum period as local boosters failed to make the necessary investments in
the regionrsquos physical infrastructure Geographer Keith Littlefield estimates that the city
lost control over 76 of the trade in its rural hinterland by 1860 as Richmond and
Alexandria expanded their commercial reach at Fredericksburgrsquos expense John
Wellfordrsquos own experience with failed turnpikes river improvements and railroads
during his pre-ironmaking days signalled a failure to secure a variety of market outlets for
Fredericksburgrsquos manufacturers Because Wellfordrsquos furnace produced pig iron ndash a high
bulk and low value commodity ndash shipping costs were a major factor in marketing its
products afar Since the cityrsquos commercial and manufacturing sector served a smaller and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
1352 SP Adams
upon the personal capital of John Spotswood Wellford The Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company struggled to find a reliable outlet for the products of Catharine
Furnace during its early history Local state and national trends created an unfavourable
atmosphere for starting an iron smelting operation during the late 1830s and early 1840s
John Wellford would have been well aware of his disadvantages in this regard As a longshy
time Fredericksburg resident with first-hand familiarity of the grandiose visions false
starts and frustrating stalls of local projects such as the Rappahannock Navigation
Company or the Fredericksburg and Potomac Creek Railroad Company Wellford
followed his entrepreneurial instincts into less traditional markets for ironmakers Rather
than wait for Fredericksburgrsquos prospects to magically reverse or dump his own financial
resources into a new improvement or manufacturing investment Wellford used his long
history of political and economic contacts to his firmrsquos advantage Military contracts
shifted the responsibility of success or failure into an entirely new area of risk ndash
Wellfordrsquos ability to maintain his contacts in the Navy and War departments and to spin
them into lucrative contracts for the production of shot and shell In the short term the
firmrsquos reliance upon government contracts saved Catharine Furnace and made the
operation profitable
In the long run though the dependency on John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos personal capital
bound the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company to its
owner and manager This was not the sort of social capital that could transfer easily to either
Johnrsquos family or his fellow incorporators In the end it was not Wellfordrsquos lack of
entrepreneurial talent that limited Catharine Furnacersquos long-term prospects but perhaps his
creative way of overcoming the various obstacles to profitable ironmaking that existed in
antebellum Virginia But just as traditional forms of financial capital need a strong
institutional environment to be effective so does social or personal capital need a
favourable context The Old Dominion for various reasons did not provide that favourable
context Wellfordrsquos case then offers an example of how his particular entrepreneurial
strategy offers up a short-term success story while at the same time exposing the difficult
context that industrial endeavours faced in the antebellum South
Local factors endemic to Fredericksburg for example played a large role in
amplifying the long-term weakness of relying upon personal rather than physical capital
for Catharine Furnace The most promising regional market Richmond essentially closed
up to Catharine Furnace pig iron by the early 1840s Once Francis Deane left the employ of
the Tredegar Company that firm failed to make massive purchases of Catharine Furnace
iron As the James River and Kanawha Canal linked the ironmakers of the Valley of
Virginia to Richmond moreover Catharine Furnace was further left out of the mix
Without the strong connections to market Wellfordrsquos successors most likely would have
continued to struggle to compete with other more integrated ironmakers In a larger sense
Fredericksburgrsquos entire manufacturing economy was being squeezed out of the picture
during the antebellum period as local boosters failed to make the necessary investments in
the regionrsquos physical infrastructure Geographer Keith Littlefield estimates that the city
lost control over 76 of the trade in its rural hinterland by 1860 as Richmond and
Alexandria expanded their commercial reach at Fredericksburgrsquos expense John
Wellfordrsquos own experience with failed turnpikes river improvements and railroads
during his pre-ironmaking days signalled a failure to secure a variety of market outlets for
Fredericksburgrsquos manufacturers Because Wellfordrsquos furnace produced pig iron ndash a high
bulk and low value commodity ndash shipping costs were a major factor in marketing its
products afar Since the cityrsquos commercial and manufacturing sector served a smaller and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
Business History 1353
smaller area Fredericksburgrsquos economic prospects and the ability of Catharine Furnace to
ship its iron both in immediate and far-flung markets shrank in kind33
State-level factors also hampered the ability of Catharine Furnace to ship iron both
efficiently and cheaply Pig iron like other bulk commodities was cheap to make but
expensive to ship Like the cost of raising coal at the mine then pig ironrsquos expense at the
furnace itself was less critical to market competition than the added carrying rates
This made an integrated system of canals or railroads critical to the success of regional
ironmaking In the Valley ironmasters first used rivers then canals to ship pig iron to
Richmond State politics in Virginia exacerbated a trend toward politically connected
internal improvements The Old Dominionrsquos creation of the Virginia Board of Public
Works in 1816 offered state subsidies on some internal improvement projects it also
placed a heavy emphasis on the creation of a central waterway linking Richmond with the
Ohio Valley The James River and Kanawha Canal therefore received the lionrsquos share of
attention and funding despite John Spotswood Wellfordrsquos toast in 1828 touting the Board
as an agency that lsquohelped those who helped themselvesrsquo Shipping tobacco wheat and
corn along this route became the major concern of Virginiarsquos internal improvement
network such as it was as the Board of Public Works followed a political calculus that
favoured the products of Tidewater and Piedmont agricultural interests along the James
River corridor As Spotsylvania County did not figure on this route its chances of securing
a state-funded turnpike or canal were slim The timing of Catharine Furnacersquos construction
in the wake of the Panic of 1837 was also disadvantageous not only because general
business conditions in the state deteriorated but also because Virginiarsquos public investment
in its internal improvement network completely stalled in the early-to-mid 1840s Without
private capital to finance internal improvements and with state actors primarily concerned
with the James ndash Kanawha corridor Catharine Furnace could not count on any decrease in
shipping costs both within and out of Virginia Like colliers and saltmakers in western
Virginia who found the policies of the Virginia legislature wanting ironmakers in eastern
Virginia found themselves on the outside looking in when it came to the Old Dominionrsquos
sponsorship of economic growth34
The firmrsquos reliance upon slave labour also magnified the impact of personal capital at
Catharine Furnace While most moulders and other skilled positions were filled by
immigrant or native-born white workers the vast majority of southern ironmakers relied
upon slaves for unskilled labour The rhythm of this market was decidedly different from
free labour markets in the North In Virginia the hiring season began in early January
when ironmasters or their agents would travel to the eastern part of the state Orange
Louisa and Spotsylvania counties were all prime hiring spots and the net flow of slaves
from those regions to the Valley was large Because Catharine Furnace was situated in
Spotsylvania County John Spotswood Wellford enjoyed certain advantages in the hiring
market over his competitors from the Valley Unlike ironmasters in the Valley for whom
distance was an issue the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company
operated in close proximity to several counties that were important sources for slave
hiring as well as the urban centre of Fredericksburg As a result Wellfordrsquos account book
contains references not only to the traditional one-year hirings but also shorter periods of
one or two months sometimes even a few weeks at a time As a slave-owner himself
moreover Wellford also allocated anywhere from 13 to 21 of his own slaves to Catharine
Furnace when necessary Since Wellford often fleshed out his labour force with short-term
hires the years in which large numbers of slaves were hired most likely reflect a certain
amount of turnover as well as periods in which the demands of ironmaking dictated a
number of short-term hires This fluctuation in slave hiring was not unusual in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
1354 SP Adams
antebellum Virginia iron industry New Cloverdale Furnace for example hired 35 slaves
in 1841 but increased this amount to 55 in 1842 The actual number of workers then
often depended upon the available stockpile of raw materials the length of the blast and
the market for pig iron in any given year The larger numbers moreover may be explained
by more turnover or short-term hires or by more slaves being allocated to work in the iron
ore pits or at charcoaling In sum it is difficult to estimate just how many slaves were at
work at Catharine Furnace at any given time although the minimum number of 33 in 1844
seems to correlate with contemporary estimates on how many workers were needed to
keep an antebellum iron furnace running What is most important though is that as this
was a temporary and shifting labour force most workers at Catharine Furnace were unable
to acquire the skill set necessary to make high-quality pig iron much less complicated
castings such as cannon stoves or structural iron35
Enslaved labour was therefore a good solution when Catharine Furnace was engaged
in the relatively straightforward process of casting shot and shell Wellford employed
itinerant skilled white moulders but since the patterns and gauges were all provided by the
War Department Catharine Furnace invested little time and effort developing a core
labour force of skilled and flexible ironworkers Unlike many northern furnaces which
during the 1830s and 1840s became proficient in casting complex products Catharine
Furnace remained profitable in the short term but relatively single-minded in its strategy
of production Merritt Roe Smith referred to lsquothe stamina of local culturersquo at Harpers
Ferry in which slavery played a role as a major detractor to implementing technological
change there Although Catharine Furnace had a different impetus for change in that
Wellford did not have federal authorities directly attempting to reorganise production at
his complex the debilitating impact on the firmrsquos flexibility and capacity to grow was
functionally similar36
Finally national economic trends diminished Catharine Furnacersquos future as a
traditional charcoal-based iron operation In 1846 Democrats in Congress pushed through
a massive revision of tariff rates that effectively ended the protective duties on American
iron When Congress lowered the tariff on iron from a flat rate of $25 on bar iron to an ad
valorem rate of 30 ndash functionally a drop of more than half the duty on iron ndash prices for
Virginia charcoal iron pigs plummeted to $20 a ton37 In December of 1846 Virginia
ironmasters met in Richmond to discuss the precipitous drop in tariff rates and its resulting
effect on prices In a missive to Congress they concluded that lsquothe trade will ere long be
destroyed by the reductionrsquo The Federal government seemed like a good place to assign
the immediate blame for the misfortunes of charcoal ironmakers of Virginia In fact the
reduction in the duties on iron only accelerated a national trend in the iron trade away from
charcoal fuel In 1840 David Thomas successfully adapted anthracite coal to the Lehigh
Crane Iron Companyrsquos blast furnace near Allentown Pennsylvania The successful
adaptation of coke or processed bituminous coal in western Pennsylvania and Maryland
blast furnaces offered yet another low-cost alternative to charcoal iron Even it if had
survived its founder it is highly unlikely that Catharine Furnace would have been able to
compete in the rapidly changing American iron trade The use of slave labour by iron
furnaces in the Old Dominion had very little to do with this trend as managers like
Wellford made very efficient use of enslaved labour in their operations Rather the overall
impact of slavery upon Virginiarsquos political economy which hampered technological
innovation investments in skilled labour and a flexible work force undermined Virginia
iron in the national context Although Virginia charcoal ironmakers clung to the idea that
theirs was a superior product their inability to lower costs in the face of northern
competition sealed their fate by the 1850s Simply put the future of ironmaking in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
Business History 1355
United States was moving steadily to the north and to the west Virginiarsquos long tradition of
ironmaking stretching back to the colonial era could not overcome these new innovations
in the use of mineral fuel and more efficient techniques38
Conclusion
The combination of these local state and national factors spelled doom for Catharine
Furnacersquos iron in more traditional markets In this sense John Spotswood Wellford acted as
any talented manager would and shifted the resources of his firm into the most profitable
environment His effective control of the company allowed him to pursue ordnance
manufacture as a main avenue for profit his personal connections served as the single most
important factor in that business and demonstrate the short-term power of social capital
Although it served as Virginiarsquos first chartered iron company the Fredericksburg Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Company functionally operated as a single proprietorship under
Wellfordrsquos leadership Because of the vagaries of the antebellum military contracting
system Wellford was able to use his personal capital in lieu of Catharine Furnacersquos
physical capital Estimates of the annual operating costs and revenues suggest that
Catharine Furnace was breaking even by 1841 and had become profitable by 1842
These figures however do not take into account long-term capital expenditures such as
land purchases and they are rough estimates drawn from Wellfordrsquos own account book
Nonetheless for a firm that came on line during one of the worst business environments in
the history of the United States making it into the blackwas an impressive accomplishment
in and of itself The reliance uponWellfordrsquos own personal capital though had a downside
As Figure 3 suggests Catharine Furnace had become almost completely dependent upon
ordnance contracts for its income by 1842 Since these contracts were made with
individuals not corporations Wellfordrsquos personal contacts and reputation were essential to
Figure 3 Receipts of iron sales at Catharine Furnace by locationNote lsquoNortheastrsquo includes Boston New York Providence RI and Portland ME lsquoSouthrsquo includesRichmond and Fredericksburg VA Charleston SC and Washington DCSource Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 27 ndash30 57 ndash8 61 63 71 FAMCC
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
1356 SP Adams
this revenue stream and his vast reserves of lsquosocial capitalrsquo did not pass on to his business
partners or his children So even though the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel Company was a
corporation that could outlive any one of its shareholders it could not survive without its
most essential one John Spotswood Wellford
So what do we make of Catharine Furnacersquos brief existence Certainly in the short
run John Spotswood Wellford reversed the fortunes of the Fredericksburg Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Company and overcame the faulty market timing that put his furnace into
blast amidst the nationrsquos worst depression to date However underlying this short-term
story of success lies a more troubling narrative of systematic failure At a time when
manufacturing concerns nationwide trended towards larger capitalisation flexible
production and tapped into well-established market linkages Wellfordrsquos strategy took
precisely the opposite course Instead of expanding the firmrsquos physical capital and helping
Fredericksburg and Virginiarsquos industrial sector grow Catharine Furnace instead relied
almost exclusively upon the personal capital of its well-connected manager and principal
stockholder Unlike Samuel Colt who parlayed the many political and social contacts of
his father Roswell into an industrial empire in Connecticut ndash a process creatively labelled
lsquocasinocrony-stylersquo capitalism in a recent study39 ndash Wellfordrsquos family could not follow
up on his individual success In the end Catharine Furnace followed the path forged by
Harpers Ferry rather than that of Springfield Frankford or lsquoColtsvillersquo in Hartford
The Virginia location of these two industrial laggards is no coincidence In fact the case
study of Catharine Furnace reveals three problems with Virginiarsquos institutional climate
that would plague the statersquos industrial sector throughout the antebellum period These
contextual shortcomings in turn amplified the inherent limitations in growing markets out
of military ordnance contracting As it turns out making markets out of shot and shell
worked for John Spotswood Wellford at the same time that it failed for Virginiarsquos
antebellum industrial growth
Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Organization of American Historians the National Park Service and the University of Floridarsquos College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for supporting this research
Notes 1 For an overview on the American economy on the eve of the Panic of 1837 see Temin
The Jacksonian Economy 59ndash 112 Wilentz The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln 436ndash46 456 ndash65 Howe What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 498 ndash 508
2 On the railroad boom in Virginia see Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 367 ndash9 Ward ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo 416 ndash 17 On the growth of iron in eastern Virginia see Swank The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages 269ndash71 514 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 170 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 147 123ndash5 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 82 ndash4
3 Soon after incorporation Alexander Henderson gave up his share in the firm to William Crump Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 337ndash8 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 72 For more on this use of corporate law in antebellum Virginia see Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 167ndash9
4 Laird ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo 685 692 as well as the seven articles in this special volume A seminal work in the area of ldquosocial capitalrdquo for historians of antebellum industrialisation is Lamoreaux Insider Lending For more on the recent ldquocultural turnrdquo in the study of antebellum entrepreneurship see Tucker and Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicusrdquo 208 ndash 18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
Business History 1357
5 Wells Origins of the Southern Middle Class Byrne Becoming Bourgeois Eelman Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Downey Planting a Capitalist South Gagnon Transition to an Industrial South For a good overview of the literature on southern antebellum industrialisation see the essays in Delfino and Gillespie Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in the American South
6 Robert Wellford Diary September 29 1819 (p 16) Virginia Historical Society (VHS) Spotsylvania Land Tax Rolls for 1836 Library of Virginia Richmond Virginia (LVA) Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Rolls 1837 LVA Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Rolls 1837 LVA The American Farmer (Baltimore MD) November 25 1825 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) October 14 1828 September 1 1829 April 29 1834 November 24 1835 December 11 1840
7 The Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) October 2 1827 September 30 1828 February 24 1829 September 11 and September 22 1835 August 9 1838 February 18 1840 May 8 1840 United States Telegraph (Washington DC) January 14 1834 African Repository and Colonial Journal 2 (1826) 30 Fredericksburg City Personal Property Tax Records for 1835 p 11 LVA
8 Majewski ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Citiesrdquo John Spotswood Wellford to Samuel G Wright January 31 1823 and December 30 1826 Wright Family Papers (Accession 1665) Series One Samuel G Wright Letters Received Hagley Museum and Library Greenville Delaware
9 A Collection of All Such Acts of the General Assembly of Virginia of a Public and Permanent Nature as Have Passed Since the Session of 1801 81ndash91 The North American Review and Miscellaneous Journal 8 (1819) 7ndash8 Political Arena (Fredericksburg VA) February 12 May 2 August 12 1828 September 1 1828 February 5 1836 Literary Register a Weekly Paper (Oxford OH) February 7 1829
10 Political Arena (Fredericksburg) May 3 1831 April 13 1832 February 12 1836 11 Overman The Manufacture of Iron 158 12 Spotsylvania County Personal Tax Books 1838 LVA See pp 6 ndash7 of the Catharine Furnace
Account Book Fredericksburg Area Museum and Cultural Center (FAMCC) 13 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 177
Ralph Happell ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo 261 Brockenbrough Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia 2 361ndash 62
14 Dew Bond of Iron 66 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 16ndash17 Gordon American Iron 83ndash4 Martin and Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia 282ndash3 ldquoPetition of Inhabitants of Fredericksburg and Falmouth in the State of Virginia Praying that Fredericksburg May be Made a Port of Entryrdquo House Doc 130 24th Cong 1st Sess (1836)
15 Turner ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo 359 ndash61 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 47
16 Sales figures here from p 27 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC For the Fredericksburg Union Manufacturing Companyrsquos charter see Laws of Virginia 1835 ndash36 338 ndash40 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 152ndash6
17 Charles Carter Wellford to Beverly Wellford April 13 1838 Wellford Family Papers Section 9 VHS Barrett The Old Merchants of New York City 154
18 All sales figures for 1838 ndash41 come from pp 28 ndash31 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
19 JR Anderson to John S Wellford July 9 1841 September 29 1841 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 865 LVA for transactions between Tredegar and Catharine Furnace see pp 27 ndash29 of the Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC David J Burr reference is from the entry for February 12 1841 p 25 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC JR Anderson to John S Wellford 11 June 1845 Tredegar Iron Works Business Records Series VII Correspondence Outgoing Box 868 LVA Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 154ndash70 quote is from p 164
20 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 73 ndash4 Wellfordrsquos entry in the Catharine Furnace account book for August 13 1841 (p 31) reads ldquoPaid my expenses to Washington city with Messrs Deane amp Carmichael to obtain contracts for ordnancerdquo
21 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy September 11 1841 RG45 Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library Entry 390 Bureau of Construction Equipment and Repair Contract Ledgers 1833ndash57 Vol 1 p 270 National
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
1358 SP Adams
Archives and Records Administration Washington DC (NARA) Entries for May 23 June 30 July 20 and July 30 1842 pp 35 ndash7 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
22 See for example Hounshell From the American System to Mass Production 45ndash50 Farley Making Arms in the Machine Age Smith Harpers Ferry Armory Quote is from Smith ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo 86
23 Contract Between John S Wellford and the United States Navy Ordnance Contracts 1845 ndash 76 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836ndash1939 Vol 1 pp 9ndash10 NARA Entries for December 31 1842 and December 31 1843 pp 43 51 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC
24 Entries for December 30 1842 April 5 July 21 and September 19 1843 in Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 40 46 49 FAMCC William G Ridgelyrsquos appointments can be traced in ldquoNaval Register Corrected to the 1st of April 1837rdquo The Naval Magazine 2 (1837) 57 and Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States 16 John S Wellford to Commodore Crane March 30 1843 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received NARA
25 William Wellford to WM Crane June 30 1843 John S Wellford to WMC Crane August 19 1843 WMC Crane to John S Wellford October 10 1843 John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 p 66 NARA
26 WM Crane to Gouverneur Kemble John S Wellford FB Deane George L Pervis and Cyrus Alger August 20 1844 WM Crane to JR Anderson August 20 1844 WM Crane to John S Wellford May 22 1845 RG74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 105 175 NARA Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 11ndash13
27 Entries for December 31 1843 and December 31 1844 pp 53 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC RJ Walker ldquoLetter from the Secretary of the Treasury Transmitting an Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of the Government for the Year Ending June 30 1845rdquo House Doc 14 29th Cong 1st Sess (1845) 173
28 Entries for July 2 1844 October 5 1844 December 31 1844 pp 54 55 61 Catharine Furnace Account Book FAMCC John S Wellford to L Warrington October 2 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 22 Miscellaneous Letters Received Box 4 (August 1846 to December 1847) NARA WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquo House Doc 51 29th Cong 1st Sess (1846) 64 WL Marcy ldquoLetter from the Secretary of War Transmitting Statements of Contracts Made Under Authority of That Department During the Year 1845rdquoHouse Doc 46 29th Cong 2nd Sess (1847) 67 ndash8
29 Northington ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginiardquo 74 Charles Dyer to CC Wellford January 21 1847 RH Cunningham to Messr McFarland and Rhodes February 19 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg Virginia (FRSP)
30 Lewis Warrington to John S Wellford September 3 1846 October 20 1846 October 26 1846 November 18 1846 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 5 Miscellaneous Letters Sent 1842 ndash83 Vol 1 pp 287 292 295 306 NARA
31 Contract Between Edward Carmichael and the US Navy Ordnance Contracts Vol 1 pp 170 ndash 171 RG 74 Records of the Bureau of Ordnance Entry 162 Records Relating to Supplies Accounts Contracts and Personnel 1836 ndash 1939 NARA Edward Carmichael to William A Jackson January 14 1847 Edward Carmichael to William Wellford February 1 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael February 27 1847 Reneau Manuscripts Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park Fredericksburg VA (FRSP)
32 Memorandum of NCL Moncure February 5 1847 William Wellford to Edward Carmichael 6 February 1847 Reneau Manuscripts FRSP The Democratic Recorder (Fredericksburg VA) April 2 1847
33 Swank Iron in All Ages 271 Dew Ironmaker to the Confederacy 32 Littlefield ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban Systemrdquo 167
34 Dunaway History of the James River and Kanawha Canal 50ndash58 Goodrich ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed Enterpriserdquo Hunter ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginiardquo 49ndash51 Adams Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth 86ndash92
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
Business History 1359
35 Dew Bond of Iron 67ndash9 Lewis Coal Iron and Slaves 192ndash3 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 107 ndash8 112 Catharine Furnace Account Book pp 31 33
36 Smith Harpers Ferry Armory 335 37 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 172 ndash4 38 Memorial of the Coal Owners and Iron Masters of Virginia to Congress January 1847
(Richmond np 1847) 10 Yates ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Hunter ldquoInfluence of the Market Urdquo 260ndash61 Bruce Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era 276ndash7 Bradford ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Industry of Virginiardquo 171ndash83 Temin Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America 77ndash80 Smith ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industryrdquo 125 ndash34 Gordon American Iron 155ndash 70
39 Tucker and Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America 41ndash 91
Notes on contributor Sean Patrick Adams is Associate Professor of History at the University of Florida
References Adams Sean Patrick Old Dominion Industrial Commonwealth Coal Politics and Economy in
Antebellum America Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 2004 Barrett Walter The Old Merchants of New York City New York Thomas R Knox 1885 Bradford Samuel Sydney ldquoThe Ante-Bellum Charcoal Iron Industry of Virginiardquo 1958 PhD diss
Columbia University Brockenbrough William Virginia Cases or Decisions of the General Court of Virginia Vol 2
Richmond Peter Cotton 1826 Bruce Kathleen Virginia Iron Manufacture in the Slave Era New York The Century Company
1931 Byrne Frank Becoming Bourgeois Merchant Culture in the South 1820 ndash 1865 Lexington
University of Kentucky Press 2009 Delfino Susanna and Gillespie Michele eds Global Perspectives on Industrial Transformation in
the American South Columbia University of Missouri Press 2005 Dew Charles Bond of Iron Master and Slave at Buffalo Forge New York WW Norton 1994 Dew Charles Ironmaker to the Confederacy Joseph R Anderson and the Tredegar Iron Works
New Haven Yale University Press 1966 Downey Thomas Planting a Capitalist South Masters Merchants and Manufacturers in the
Southern Interior 1790 ndash 1860 Baton Rouge LSU Press 2006 Dunaway Wayland History of the James River and Kanawha Canal New York Columbia
University Press 1922 Eelman Bruce Entrepreneurs in the Southern Upcountry Commercial Culture in Spartanburg
South Carolina 1845 ndash 1880 Athens University of Georgia Press 2008 Farley James J Making Arms in the Machine Age Philadelphiarsquos Frankford Arsenal 1816 ndash 1870
University Park PA Penn State Press 1994 Gagnon Michael Transition to an Industrial South Athens Georgia 1830 ndash 1870 Baton Rouge
LSU Press 2012 Goodrich Carter ldquoThe Virginia System of Mixed-Enterprise A Study of Planning of Internal
Improvementsrdquo Political Science Quarterly 64 (1949) 355ndash 387 Gordon Robert American Iron 1607 ndash 1900 Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996 Happell Ralph ldquoThe Chancellors of Chancellorsvillerdquo The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 71 (1963) 259ndash 277 Hounshell David From the American System to Mass Production 1800 ndash 1932 The Development of
Manufacturing Technology in the United States Baltimore The Johns Hopkins University Press 1985
Howe Daniel Walker What Hath God Wrought The Transformation of America 1815 ndash 1848 New York Oxford University Press 2007
Hunter Louis ldquoInfluence of the Market upon Technique in the Iron Industry in Western Pennsylvania up to 1860rdquo Journal of Economic and Business History 1 (1929) 241ndash 281
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-
1360 SP Adams
Hunter Robert ldquoThe Turnpike Movement in Virginia 1816 ndash 1860rdquo PhD diss Columbia University 1957
Laird Pamela Walker ldquoPutting Social Capital to Workrdquo Business History 50 (2008) 685ndash 694 Lamoreaux Naomi Insider Lending Banks Personal Connections and Economic Development in
Industrial New England New York Cambridge University Press 1996 Lewis Ronald Coal Iron and Slaves Industrial Slavery in Maryland and Virginia 1715 ndash 1865
Westport CT Greenwood Press 1979 Littlefield Keith Edward ldquoEconomic Challenge and Mercantile Enterprise in a Southern Urban
System A Case Study of Fredericksburg Virginia 1835ndash1880rdquo 1999 PhD diss University of Maryland
Majewski John ldquoThe Political Impact of Great Commercial Cities State Investment in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginiardquo Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27 (Summer 1997) 1ndash 26
Martin Joseph and William Brockenbrough A New and Comprehensive Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia Charlottesville Joseph Martin 1835
Northington OF ldquoThe Revival of the Iron Industry in Eastern Virginia as Exemplified by the History of Catharine Furnace of Spotsylvania Countyrdquo The William and Mary Quarterly 2nd ser 16 (1936) 71 ndash 80
Overman Frederick The Manufacture of Iron in All its Various Branches Philadelphia Henry C Baird 1854
Smith James Larry ldquoHistorical Geography of the Southern Charcoal Iron Industry 1800 ndash 1860rdquo 1982 PhD diss University of Tennessee
Smith Merritt Roe Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology Ithaca NY Cornell University Press 1977
Smith Merritt Roe ldquoArmy Ordnance and the lsquoAmerican Systemrsquo of Manufacturingrdquo In Military Enterprise and Technological Change Perspectives on the American Experience edited by Merritt Roe Smith 39 ndash 86 Cambridge MA MIT Press 1985
Swank James The Manufacture of Iron in All Ages Philadelphia The Iron and Steel Association 1892
Temin Peter Iron and Steel in Nineteenth-Century America An Economic Inquiry Cambridge MA The MIT Press 1964
Temin Peter The Jacksonian Economy New York WW Norton 1969 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker Industrializing Antebellum America The Rise of
Manufacturing Entrepreneurs in the Early Republic New York Palgrave-Macmillan 2008 Tucker Barbara and Kenneth Tucker ldquoThe Limits of Homo Economicus An Appraisal of Early
American Entrepreneurshiprdquo Journal of the Early Republic 24 (2004) 208ndash 218 Turner Charles ldquoThe Early Railroad Movement in Virginiardquo Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography 55 (1947) 350ndash 371 Ward James ldquoA New Look at Antebellum Southern Railroad Developmentrdquo The Journal of
Southern History 39 (1973) 409ndash 420 Wells Jonathan Daniel Origins of the Southern Middle Class 1800 ndash 1861 Chapel Hill University
of North Carolina Press 2003 Wilentz Sean The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln New York WW Norton
2005 Yates W Ross ldquoDiscovery of the Process of Making Anthracite Ironrdquo Pennsylvania Magazine of
History and Biography 98 (1974) 206ndash 223
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
earing U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
03
20 0
5 O
ctob
er 2
014
- Abstract
- Introduction
- John Spotswood Wellford southern entrepreneur
- The birth of Catharine Furnace
- Making shot and shell for Washington
- Personal capital and the problem of industrialisation in Virginia
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
-