The Papers of Thomas A. Edison, vol. 6: Electrifying New York and Abroad, April 1881–March 1883 (review)

Writing in Isis in 1962, Whitfield J. Bell Jr., one of the editors of the papers of Benjamin Franklin, observed that the editor of historical papers inevitably acts as both historian and biographer. More pointedly, he noted that the editor of a scientist’s papers, “like the biographer, shows his subject ever learning, ever growing; he shows [his subject’s] knowledge becoming, not simply achieved” (“Editing a Scientist’s Papers,” Isis 53 [March 1962]: 18). In volume 6 of The Papers of Thomas A. Edison, we watch Edison’s technical and business knowledge continue becoming. We also watch as he and a growing coterie of close associates expand their collective store of knowledge over an expanding scope and scale of operations, the international electrical engineering industry.

In a life seemingly full of transitions, the early 1880s saw Edison make the transition from entrepreneurial inventor to mass manufacturer and business entrepreneur. Leaving the laboratory of Menlo Park to demonstrate his electric lighting system in a “real world” context, Edison also moved quickly to establish his system in England, on the Continent, and elsewhere. To accomplish his expansive goals, he delegated much of the work to his most trusted assistants and engaged key new associates. Along the way, Edison came to better understand and more effectively exercise his business acumen, the court system, the press, and the importance of being a good judge of character.

Nevertheless, he continued to rely on technological problem-solving and innovation as the primary path to success and in the process demonstrated the undeniable value of that approach. At least, that is the clear impression one gains from reading document after document wherein Edison and his associates address technical issues in the context of operating utilities. In letters and transatlantic cables, they raise, analyze, and respond to technical problems confronting the successful operation of the lighting system in a dozen different locales on two continents.

No less impressive than Edison’s intellectual growth is the growing competence and authority exercised by many of his former Menlo Park comrades and some new associates. Charles Batchelor oversaw the construction of Edison’s exhibition at the Paris Exposition as well as several commercial installations on the Continent. Francis Upton, the university trained mathematician, became manager of the lamp production factory, where continuous improvement was required, first in Menlo Park and then the enlarged operation in Harrison, New Jersey. Francis Jehl, who began as a young lab assistant, first worked on the development of the electric meter in New York and then oversaw the installation of Edison’s lighting system in the municipal theater in what was then Brunn, Austria, and started a lamp factory in the same town, all by the age of twenty-three.

Notable among the relative newcomers was Egisto Fabbri, a partner in Drexel, Morgan and Company, who was one of the original investors in Edison’s New York lighting companies and became a key advisor on Edison’s overseas ventures. Richard Dyer was engaged as Edison’s chief patent attorney and advisor. Samuel Insull was just twenty when he joined Edison in 1881 as private secretary and within the two years under consideration here had become, in addition, Edison’s personal financial manager, a trusted advisor, and an officer of various Edison companies. As the editors point out, Edison seems to have penned fewer than 200 documents among the thousands generated during these two years. The speed with which Insull, in particular, gained command of the technical and business details of Edison’s activities is truly impressive.

This volume of the Edison papers has appeared eighteen years after the first volume. The headnotes and footnotes illustrate the same scholarly approach and meticulous research. The format and intellectual approach are similarly familiar. Perhaps they are all too familiar. Perhaps familiarity does breed a form of contempt, for...