Analysis Of David R. Meyer's The Root Of American Industrialization

David R. Meyer, in his paper “The Root of American Industrialization,” discusses the rise of industrialization and how it ties to agriculture. Meyer claims that agriculture and industry coexist very well with each other, even though it may seem like they should not. One of his arguments for this is that farms, and other working people, provide the demand for manufactured goods as well as creating capital that is utilized by the manufacturers. On the other hand, Meyer argues that railroads and canals played only a small role in industrialization; however, that is not the case. Railroads and canals were important for industrialization because they offered cheap, long distance shipping, and allowed fast and easy transportation of people.
Farms

are generally self sufficient, able to provide for themselves, and make what they need, and buy the few things they can not. However, if farmers are self sufficient, why was there a need for industrialization? According to Meyer, “farmers supplied… agricultural products to rural and urban dwellers, and this population demanded manufactures.” There was the demand for manufactured goods from these people, and so, entrepreneurs consolidated small workshops in order to serve a larger market. They were able to do so because of the rich agricultural areas. Those rich agricultural areas provided capital, which was used by the manufacturers. Because of agriculture, manufacturers were able to get a foothold, through capital received from farmers and demand that the farmers and other people had for the manufactured goods. However, producing goods is pointless unless there was a way to transport it to consumers.
Meyer's main argument for railroads and canals being unimportant is that “wagons offered flexible, direct connections between origins and destinations” and that “within a distance of about fifty miles, the cost of wagon transport was competitive with alternative transport modes.” This is significant because Meyer claims that “Most of the richest agricultural and industrial areas of the East were less than one hundred miles from the largest cities” which allowed the farmers and manufacturers to ship more cheaply using wagons than with canals or railroads.

Wagons may provide a direct connection between origins and destinations, but they lack the speed of trains. Wagons also can not travel as far as trains, being constrained by the driver and the horses or other animal used to pull the wagon. Trains can, with enough fuel, travel as far as there are rails. Additionally, over longer distances, trains were more economical than wagons. Trains also allowed those goods to reach people long distances away from the factory. Despite the majority of the richest agricultural and industrial areas being relatively close to cities, there were still many people living in more rural areas. Trains would allow manufacturers to more easily reach those

people.
Trains not only transported goods, but passengers as well. Trains provided a fast, easy way for people to get from the rural countryside into cities. This quick and easy mode of transportation allowed people to move into the city to find work. This was especially important for women and children, who often were not able to earn much through agriculture. Trains enabling women and children to travel to the city to work in factories, gave manufacturers more labor.
Farmers demanded certain goods, and manufacturers supplied those goods, which allowed industrialization to thrive. Industrialization and farmers were also able to thrive because of trains and canals. Despite Meyer claiming that trains and canals provided nearly nothing for industrialization, they played an important role in its development.