The terms "boat workers" and "middle men" are virtually synonymous in the context of the Haverstraw and Greater Hudson Valley brick industry
Brickmaking on the Hudson was dependent on the boat shipping industry, with the river acting as a highway for countless boats bringing bricks from the yards to the docks of New York City and beyond, the product to be sold to contractors and builders. The “frog,” or front of the brick, was molded into the green clay by countless companies, helping the captain of the middlemen know where their brick was coming from, if it was a structural or face brick, how much to sell it for, etc.
As the Haverstraw and Hudson brick industries began to take shape on a massive scale in the 1860s, many brick manufacturers commissioned schooners to be built to ship their bricks. These boats were primarily built in Nyack and Kingston — the former evidenced in Daniel de Noyelles newspaper clippings — to be constructed for shipping their product. Bricks were stored both on the deck and in the holds, and a schooner like FANNIE E. FOWLER, owned by Denton Fowler and Captain Williams Van-Orden, could carry roughly 60,000 bricks per trip.[1]
As noted by Captain “Tom” Farley, the last schooner captain involved in the brick trade, these sailing vessels were the “fastest on the river” with the ability to “beat a tow of barges down the Hudson” and go from Haverstraw to NYC in 8 hours. However, as noted by the Captain in the same thought, “delivery of brick” was “dependent on shifts of wind and tide,” resulting in steam and barge boats “completely supersed[ing]” them. [2]
George H. Corliss’ steam engine, patented in 1849, revolutionized both the brickyard industry and brick transportation. This innovation allowed for “precise control of steam admission to the piston cylindrical valves” and an increase in productivity — consisting of greater horsepower alongside a 40% decrease of fuel consumption necessary to run the engine. Hudson manufacturers quickly took advantage of these machines, building them at Newburgh and Fishkill.
Soon after, the steam-powered tugboat was invented, and the Cornell Steamboat Company of Roundout quickly monopolized shipping on the Hudson. Brick manufacturers were forced to go through Cornell if they wanted to have their barge boats towed. [3]
THE LARGE CHAIN TOWS CREATED MINI VILLAGES ON THE HUDSON
Hudson River Tow, c1905, New York Hudson River, Detroit Publishing Co.
Despite this perceived hurdle, the introduction of barge boats increased shipping amounts drastically, with each carrying an average of 350,000 bricks.
Barge life was unique. Men lived on their boats in close quarters to each other for the majority of the year. Barge crews averaged 5 men to each boat, discounting the ship’s captain. Further advancements in towing allowed for a large and small tugboat sailing together to tow multiple barges in what was coined a true “tow” by brick workers. [4]
This tow, pictured to the left, shows an example of the mini-villages that sailed up and down the river, with “a typical tow” being around “three or four across seven or more vessels long [that] stretch[ed] for 1/4 mile." [5] This not only helped break the isolation of respective boats but also promoted workers from different manufacturers, backgrounds, etc., to mingle in their downtime.
The boatmen made roughly 2 trips per month to NYC when the industry was busy. Their total work season lasted a little longer than those of the brick workers, stopping only from December to March when the ice overtook the Hudson. In the offseason, when they were not living in their small homes on the boats, they were in town and could “be found around the store stoves relating their years’ experiences.”[6]
Much like the brickmakers on the yards who did not own but leased land and brick-making machinery, the barge workers did not own the barge boats. Thus, their wages were dictated by barge owners who more than not were also brick yard owners.
However, from navigating the waves and channels of the river to physically moving thousands of bricks per day, bricks would not be able to move from the brickyards to the construction site without the boat workers.Thus, they soon used their labor as leverage to recieve what they perceived as fair compensation.
On the winter morning of February 15, 1900, as the winds of the river rushed chilled air from the water into the Village of Haverstraw, a work stoppage spearheaded by the barge workers ensued at the yards of Washburn & Co., Worrall and Burns, Fowler & Washburn, and Fowler Co. The stoppage was the result of lengthy disputes regarding the barge workers’ wages. During the regular season, these men made roughly 35$ a month. However, when the brickyards closed in the winter, the barge boat owners hired men from New York City docks, paying them $9 to $13 per trip.[7] The barge owners and barge workers continued to go back and forth regarding wages. Manufacturers proposed various forms of pay-per-trip pay models, and workers refused.
Fed-up, barge workers sabotaged barge owners that employed workers by the trip, knocking their bricks off into the water.
Harry Peter’s brick barge. Daniel De Noyelles Collection, Haverstraw Brick Museum Archives.
The close-knit camaraderie that was a byproduct of the bargeman's work life ultimately gave way to what was most likely Haverstraw’s first brick-related union. Later in the day, some of these workers collectively met at Casino Hall in the Village of Haverstraw and “intended to form a permanent organization,” “elect a set of officers and use every possible legitimate means to protect their interests” according to the Rockland Times.[8] The men elected Patrick Byrnes as president of the Boatmen’s Association, more “commonly known as the Boatmen’s Union.” Thus Haverstraw had “but one labor organization” at the turn of the 20th century.[9]
Although there is no direct reference to this union until 1904, it is most likely that this union was — or what would become — Local No. 474 of the Haverstraw Bay Boatmen’s Union.[10] Working as a collective bargaining unit, the boatmens’ union “indulged in a mild sort of strike” on March 9, 1901, right as shipping commenced for the year’s brick season. Demanding that all yards pay them 35$ per month — as some paid them 30$ — their demands were shortly agreed to.[11]
The Haverstraw union soon came into conflict with related brick unions of NYC. On January 31, 1903, members of the NYC handler unions made the trek to Haverstraw. Their delegate, John Miller, attempted to persuade manufacturers to send boats single handed to NYC, rather than the standard 5-man barge crew.
This was due to 5-man boat crews resulting in less work for the handlers. To entice manufacturers, the handler’s delegate claimed they would work for 40 cents, rather than the standard 50 cents, per “M,” or thousand bricks. The delegates also offered to bring city handlers onto outside boats to “stow,” or load the barges at Haverstraw.[12]
Although the barge workers initially used direct action, they soon took to bargaining and negotiating with their employers for “protection against” the handler’s unions. On February 5, the Rockland County Times depicted the “aroused” barge workers in Haverstraw and Stony Point meeting in the village Owaneco Club Rooms and forming The Haverstraw Bay Protective Association.
The men argued for more employment at the expense of wages, telling manufacturers that it would be more financially sound to pay a 5-man crew 35$ each per month, rather than 40 Cents per M respectively. More importantly, they put forth demands: that all barges be full 5-man crews, that when an extra crew member was hired they be paid 2 Cents per M, and that when outside boats were packed by local men the total crew be paid 25 Cents per M. After electing John O’ Keefe to represent and arbitrate their demands, the Times reported that most manufacturers “readily agreed to” them.[13]
Tensions only continued between the boat and handler unions as the year went on. At the beginning of the brick season in 1903, the boatmen of Haverstraw utilized time to leverage their demands and once again went on strike.
The Rockland County Times cited “Record and Guide,” asserting that the Haverstraw barge men were being “organized by delegates from the brick-handlers’ union of the city.” Delegates from the city arrived on the shores of Haverstraw on March 26, 1903, demanding that at least one man on any barge crew be a part of the NYC local union.
To leverage their respective demands, they asserted that any barge owner that shipped to the city without a local NYC man on the crew would be boycotted at the construction site. The delegates were able to convince trucks from loading the bricks in the city, the drivers seemingly standing in solidarity with the handlers. Yet, this was to no avail in the larger scheme of protecting their labor.[14]
Daniel De Noyelles Collection, Haverstraw Brick Museum Archives.
While the brick layers, handlers, and barge workers were organizing, so too were the Brick manufacturers.
A year later, a massive building strike rocked New York City, expanding onto the river boats. A work stoppage amongst the bricklayers was waged with the demand that the contractors and mason builders of the Master Builders’ Association hire more union labor. As a result, brick prices plummeted.
On March 29, 1904, the manufacturers of Haverstraw met in the United States Hotel in Haverstraw. Here, they agreed upon the need to hold their boats in Haverstraw Bay until the market was more favorable to the manufacturers, citing the price of brick dropping from $1.50/thousand to $2.50/thousand, resulting in brick being $6 per “M.”
On April 1, union boat men put forth their demands to leaders of the Messrs D. Fowler & Sons and Excelsior Company yards: that the boat owners pay all men barring captains on the boats 35$ per month, their pay beginning upon them loading the boats at the brickyards, and end when they were either discharged or the boat was “put out of commission.” The manufacturers refused the boat workers’ demands, and the latter withheld their labor.[15]
On April 4, the Rockland County Journal reported that one of the handler’s unions agreed not to handle bricks in the piers if they were not initially stowed at the yards by union men. However, this was an anomaly. At the same time, tension grew between the Haverstraw boatmen and yard workers, with the latter arguing that the manufacturers should wait for a better market to sell their brick, claiming that the wages demanded by the boatmen would leave no margin for profit.[16]
Unfortunately, research as of now doesn’t yield what the longer term outcomes were of Local 474. The last major article in the local paper citing the Local consists of a fundraiser picnic hosted at Finnegan’s Brewery Park on Labor Day by the boatmen. [17]
Based upon what is available in the historical record, it can be argued that the union was outmaneuvered by the collaboration of brick manufacturers. By exploiting the divisions between the different brick industry jobs — namely, the brick makers, bargemen, and handers — and banding together, the manufacturers dictated when brick was sold for maximum profit.
WRITTEN BY LUKE SPALTRO, MUSEUM HISTORIAN
__________________________________________________________________________
Citations
[1] Daniel deNoyelles, Within These Gates (Thiells: Haverstraw Brick Museum, 2002), 34-35, 37.
[2] “Skipper ‘Josh’s’ Reporter,” The Rockland County Times, Vol. XXVI., No. 42, Sep. 30, 1916, 3.https://news.hrvh.org/veridian/?a=d&d=rocklandctytimes19160930-01.1.3&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN-brick+schooner------
[3] George V. Hutton, The Great Hudson River Brick Industry: Commemorating Three and a Half Centuries of Brickmaking (Kingston: ColorPage Publishing, 2003), 36-38, 74-75.
[4] Charles Ellery Hall, The Story Of Brick (reis., Thiells, Daniel De Noyelles), 13. Haverstraw Brick Museum Archives.
[5] “A tow on the hawser,” Past Exhibition, Haverstraw Brick Museum Archives.
[6] Haverstraw Items,” Rockland County Times, Vol. XIV, No. 15, Dec. 27, 1902, 8. https://news.hrvh.org/veridian/?a=d&d=rocklandctytimes19021227.2.49&srpos=52&e=------190-en-20--41-byDA-txt-txIN-%22boatmen%22------
[7]Not only was $18 to $26 much less than $35 a month, but the possibility of longer trips — whether it be due to weather, the weight of the cargo, etc. — gave way to being paid less.
[8]Boatmen Organize,” The Rockland County Times, Vol. XI, No. 12, Feb. 17, 1900, 1. https://news.hrvh.org/veridian/?a=d&d=rocklandctytimes19000217.2.9&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN-------
[9] “Special Meeting,” The Rockland County Times, Vol. XIV, No. 29, May 23, 4. https://news.hrvh.org/veridian/?a=d&d=rocklandctytimes19030523.2.26.5&srpos=7&e=------190-en-20-rocklandctytimes-1-byDA-txt-txIN-%22boatmen%22----1903– ; “Labor’s Big Day - Work Will Be Practically Suspended In All Directions - Many Demonstrations,” Vol. XIV, No. 48, Sep. 5, 1903, 1. https://news.hrvh.org/veridian/?a=d&d=rocklandctytimes19030905.2.2&srpos=23&e=------190-en-20--21-byDA-txt-txIN-boatmen+----1903–
[10] This reference is found in a memorial for the passing of member “John Cooke.” “Resolutions of Condolence,” Rockland County Times, Vol. XVI, No. 11, 5. https://news.hrvh.org/veridian/?a=d&d=rocklandctytimes19041022.2.27&srpos=15&e=------190-en-20-rocklandctytimes-1-byDA-txt-txIN-%22boatmen%22----1904–
[11] “Boatmen Get Raise.,” Rockland County Times, Vol. XII, No. 26, Mar. 16, 1901, 1.https://news.hrvh.org/veridian/?a=d&d=rocklandctytimes19010316.2.16.4&srpos=2&e=------190-en-20--1-byDA-txt-txIN-boatmen+----1901–
[12] “The Struggle Is On. Between Haverstraw Manufacturers and Brick Handlers’ Union,” Nyack Evening Star, Apr. 1, 1903, 8. https://news.hrvh.org/veridian/?a=d&d=jbaggcgi19030401-01.1.8&srpos=13&e=------190-en-20--1-byDA-txt-txIN-%22boatmen%22+union------ ; “Workmen Organize - Form a Union for Protection Against City Labor Unions,” The Rockland County Times, Vol. XIV, No. 14, Feb. 7, 1903, 1. https://news.hrvh.org/veridian/?a=d&d=rocklandctytimes19030207.2.8&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN-------
[13] Ibid.
[14] “Are Getting Ugly-The Brickhandler’s Trying to Fight the Hudson Men,” The Rockland County Times, Vol. XIV, No. 21, Mar. 28, 1903, 1. https://news.hrvh.org/veridian/?a=d&d=rocklandctytimes19030328.2.4&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN-------
[15] “TROUBLE IS NOW ON. ALL WORK SUSPENDED,” Vol. XV, No. 26, April 2, 1904, 1. https://news.hrvh.org/veridian/?a=d&d=rocklandctytimes19040402.2.7&srpos=1&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN-%22trouble+is+now+on%22------
[16] “Trials of Brickmakers,” The Rockland County Journal, Apr. 16, 1904, 4. https://news.hrvh.org/veridian/?a=d&d=rocklandctyjournal19040416.1.4&srpos=99&e=------190-en-20--81-byDA-txt-txIN-boatmen+------
[17] It is worth noting that the names of “the committee of arrangements, consisting of Patrick Byrnes, president; Richard Butler, secretary; Patrick , Lynch, chairman; Christopher O'Connell. floor manager, John Labunry, assistant; John Russell, sergeant at arms; Thomas Fox, his assistant, and John Farley, Martin Regan and John Curran,” suggest that the boatmen largely were Irish in origin. “Labor’s Big Picnic - Haverstraw’s Boatmen’s Union Celebrated Working Holiday,” Rockland County Times, Vol. XV, No. 10, Sep. 10, 1904, 1. https://news.hrvh.org/veridian/?a=d&d=rocklandctytimes19040910.2.7&srpos=52&e=------190-en-20-rocklandctytimes-41-byDA-txt-txIN-boatmen+-----. Daniel de Noyelles’ account of what the boatmen cooked and ate also verify that they were apart of “Irish Country.” de Noyelles, Within These Gates, 107.