A History of Public Health in New York City, 1625-1866 (review)

BOOK REVIEWS85 such cotton mills as South Carolina Factory (1777), Winnsborough Factory (1814), Hamburg Cotton Factory (1840's?), and possibly others. But considering that cotton mills were hidden, like much other southern wealth, out in rural ravines and forests, Lander has done a commendable job of locating them and explaining in an integrated fashion how they developed. After discussing the origins of the factory system, he traces the pioneer developments, first in the Piedmont, then in the middle and lower state. It was usually northern and European engineers who built the first factories. The story of William Gregg and his factory at Graniteville is told in some detail, although Lander omits mentioning that Gregg learned his trade in a Georgia mill. Interesting and well-written chapters are included on personnel, production, and marketing. Slaves were successfully used in South Carolina mills from the beginning. At Saluda a superintendent said of them that he had "never seen an equal number of entirely new hands become efficient operatives in less time." Lander reminds us that important in the development of Carolina industry were not only such familiar entrepreneurs as Cannon, Converse , and Gregg, but leading politicians, both Nullifiers and Unionists, who held financial interests in mills. Such were McDuffie, Perry, Manning , Bennett, Hammond, Allston, and John E. Calhoun, a nephew of John C. Calhoun. Joel Smith, who served in the state legislature, at one time owned stock in seventeen companies. The relationship of this group to state politics deserves greater attention than can be justified in a short economic history. Other important questions are how this group responded to secession and how it buttressed the South in the war that followed. This is a fine, scholarly book, in what it attempts, but, using its conclusions, some future scholar might well argue that the origins of the New South lie in the antebellum period. Harold Wilson Old Dominion University A History of Public Health in New York City, 1625-1866. By John Duffy. (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1968. Pp. xix, 619. $11.50.) This is the first volume of a very fine study of public health in the city of New York by an outstanding medical historian. It is based upon careful and extensive research in official records which are fortunately full for New York newspapers, journals, manuscripts, and many contemporary publications. Covering a period of over two centuries, Mr. Duffy quickly disposes of the colonial period, although some of his best previous work has dealt with that era. The bulk of his volume concerns the national period, divided into two large chronological segments , each of which is handled in topical chapters. The result can be described as a fundamental study in social history, with careful attention to the problems, the institutional responses, and the social and 86CIVIL WAR HISTORY medical results. The changing state of medical knowledge is treated but not as fully developed as would have been possible. Readers of Civil War History should understand that there is very little in this volume directly related to the war. The terminal date is not, as it might seem to be, a function of the war. It marks the founding of the Metropolitan Board of Health; the end of one era in handling public health and the beginning of a new one. As for the war, it happened along at a very inopportune moment for the development of public health reform. The city had been overwhelmed in the 1840's by a population growth which multiplied all public health problems, but in the 1850's strong currents of reform began to assert themselves —as they did throughout the nation in a variety of fields. This movement in public health was marked in 1859, for example, by the formation of the New York Sanitary Association. Efforts, however, to get a new health bill passed failed. Rising sectionalism and the war appear to have derailed continued efforts in this direction. On the other hand, some of the New York reformers did help to make a success of the United States Sanitary Commission, which worked to improve the health of Union soldiers. In return, a reverse support for New York reform efforts was received from...