{"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5","prev":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=4","next":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=6","last":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=40"},"meta":{"pages":{"current_page":5,"next_page":6,"prev_page":4,"total_pages":40,"limit_value":10,"offset_value":40,"total_count":393,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false}},"data":[{"id":"viw_repositories_2_resources_739_c01_c02","type":"Subseries","attributes":{"title":"Bellamy's Meeting House Papers and Parsonage Papers","breadcrumbs":{"id":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viw_repositories_2_resources_739_c01_c02#breadcrumbs","type":"document_value","attributes":{"value":{"ref_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_739_c01_c02","ref_ssm":["viw_repositories_2_resources_739_c01_c02"],"id":"viw_repositories_2_resources_739_c01_c02","ead_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_739","_root_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_739","_nest_parent_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_739_c01","parent_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_739_c01","parent_ssim":["viw_repositories_2_resources_739","viw_repositories_2_resources_739_c01"],"parent_ids_ssim":["viw_repositories_2_resources_739","viw_repositories_2_resources_739_c01"],"parent_unittitles_ssm":["Gloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church Records","Mss. 69 G51"],"parent_unittitles_tesim":["Gloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church Records","Mss. 69 G51"],"text":["Gloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church Records","Mss. 69 G51","Bellamy's Meeting House Papers and Parsonage Papers"],"title_filing_ssi":"Bellamy's Meeting House Papers and Parsonage Papers","title_ssm":["Bellamy's Meeting House Papers and Parsonage Papers"],"title_tesim":["Bellamy's Meeting House Papers and Parsonage Papers"],"unitdate_inclusive_ssm":["1828-1867, 1884-1886; 1852-1890"],"normalized_date_ssm":["1828/1890"],"normalized_title_ssm":["Bellamy's Meeting House Papers and Parsonage Papers"],"component_level_isim":[2],"repository_ssim":["College of William and Mary"],"collection_ssim":["Gloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church Records"],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"child_component_count_isi":1,"level_ssm":["Subseries"],"level_ssim":["Subseries"],"sort_isi":71,"parent_access_restrict_tesm":["Collection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility."],"parent_access_terms_tesm":["Before reproducing or quoting from any materials, in whole or in part, permission must be obtained from the Special Collections Research Center, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library."],"date_range_isim":[1828,1829,1830,1831,1832,1833,1834,1835,1836,1837,1838,1839,1840,1841,1842,1843,1844,1845,1846,1847,1848,1849,1850,1851,1852,1853,1854,1855,1856,1857,1858,1859,1860,1861,1862,1863,1864,1865,1866,1867,1868,1869,1870,1871,1872,1873,1874,1875,1876,1877,1878,1879,1880,1881,1882,1883,1884,1885,1886,1887,1888,1889,1890],"_nest_path_":"/components#0/components#1","timestamp":"2026-04-30T22:04:04.216Z","collection":{"numFound":1,"start":0,"numFoundExact":true,"docs":[{"id":"viw_repositories_2_resources_739","ead_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_739","_root_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_739","_nest_parent_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_739","ead_source_url_ssi":"data/oai/WM/repositories_2_resources_739.xml","title_filing_ssi":"Gloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church Records","title_ssm":["Gloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church Records"],"title_tesim":["Gloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church Records"],"unitdate_ssm":["1825-1910"],"unitdate_inclusive_ssm":["1825-1910"],"level_ssm":["collection"],"level_ssim":["Collection"],"unitid_ssm":["Mss. 69 G51","/repositories/2/resources/739"],"text":["Mss. 69 G51","/repositories/2/resources/739","Gloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church Records","Virginia--Religious history","Gloucester County (Va.)--History--19th century","Gloucester County (Va.)--History--20th century","King and Queen County (Va.)--History--19th century","King and Queen County (Va.)--History--20th century","Methodist Church--Virginia--History--19th century","Methodist Church--Virginia--History--20th century","Agendas (administrative records)","Financial records","Minutes","1163 items","Collection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility.","The original register (Acc. 2003.16) of baptisms, marriages, and members was last in the possession of Cecil Booker.","The Gloucester Circuit had six churches: Salem, Shackelford's, Bellamy's, Bethehem, Singleton's, and Olive Branch. The churches were in Gloucester and King and Queen counties, Va. Further information about this individual or organization may be available in the Special Collections Research Center Wiki:  .","Papers, 1825-1910, of the Gloucester Circuit of the Virginia Conference of the Methodist Church which covered Gloucester County and part of King and Queen County, Va. Includes minutes of quarterly conference meetings for the circuit; Sunday School class records; and building committee records."," Acc. 2003.16 is a photocopy of a register, 1879-1885, of baptisms, marriages and members. Acc. 2012.382 is a register of members of the Gloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church, 1835-1837. The first page of the register says that there were 930 white members and 19 \"coloured\" members for a total of 949. There are also notes next to the names of some of the members, which include such information as marriage dates, death dates, and positions held in the church hierarchy.","Before reproducing or quoting from any materials, in whole or in part, permission must be obtained from the Special Collections Research Center, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library.","Special Collections Research Center","Methodist Church. Virginia Conference. Richmond District. Gloucester Circuit.","English"],"unitid_tesim":["Mss. 69 G51","/repositories/2/resources/739"],"normalized_title_ssm":["Gloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church Records"],"collection_title_tesim":["Gloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church Records"],"collection_ssim":["Gloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church Records"],"repository_ssm":["College of William and Mary"],"repository_ssim":["College of William and Mary"],"geogname_ssm":["Virginia--Religious history"],"geogname_ssim":["Virginia--Religious history"],"creator_ssm":["Methodist Church. Virginia Conference. Richmond District. Gloucester Circuit."],"creator_ssim":["Methodist Church. Virginia Conference. Richmond District. Gloucester Circuit."],"creator_corpname_ssim":["Methodist Church. Virginia Conference. Richmond District. Gloucester Circuit."],"creators_ssim":["Methodist Church. Virginia Conference. Richmond District. Gloucester Circuit."],"places_ssim":["Virginia--Religious history"],"access_terms_ssm":["Before reproducing or quoting from any materials, in whole or in part, permission must be obtained from the Special Collections Research Center, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library."],"acqinfo_ssim":["Gift"],"access_subjects_ssim":["Gloucester County (Va.)--History--19th century","Gloucester County (Va.)--History--20th century","King and Queen County (Va.)--History--19th century","King and Queen County (Va.)--History--20th century","Methodist Church--Virginia--History--19th century","Methodist Church--Virginia--History--20th century","Agendas (administrative records)","Financial records","Minutes"],"access_subjects_ssm":["Gloucester County (Va.)--History--19th century","Gloucester County (Va.)--History--20th century","King and Queen County (Va.)--History--19th century","King and Queen County (Va.)--History--20th century","Methodist Church--Virginia--History--19th century","Methodist Church--Virginia--History--20th century","Agendas (administrative records)","Financial records","Minutes"],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"physdesc_tesim":["1163 items"],"extent_ssm":["2.50 Linear Feet"],"extent_tesim":["2.50 Linear Feet"],"genreform_ssim":["Agendas (administrative records)","Financial records","Minutes"],"date_range_isim":[1825,1826,1827,1828,1829,1830,1831,1832,1833,1834,1835,1836,1837,1838,1839,1840,1841,1842,1843,1844,1845,1846,1847,1848,1849,1850,1851,1852,1853,1854,1855,1856,1857,1858,1859,1860,1861,1862,1863,1864,1865,1866,1867,1868,1869,1870,1871,1872,1873,1874,1875,1876,1877,1878,1879,1880,1881,1882,1883,1884,1885,1886,1887,1888,1889,1890,1891,1892,1893,1894,1895,1896,1897,1898,1899,1900,1901,1902,1903,1904,1905,1906,1907,1908,1909,1910],"accessrestrict_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eCollection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility.\u003c/p\u003e"],"accessrestrict_heading_ssm":["Conditions Governing Access:"],"accessrestrict_tesim":["Collection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility."],"altformavail_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe original register (Acc. 2003.16) of baptisms, marriages, and members was last in the possession of Cecil Booker.\u003c/p\u003e"],"altformavail_heading_ssm":["Electronic Format:"],"altformavail_tesim":["The original register (Acc. 2003.16) of baptisms, marriages, and members was last in the possession of Cecil Booker."],"bioghist_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe Gloucester Circuit had six churches: Salem, Shackelford's, Bellamy's, Bethehem, Singleton's, and Olive Branch. The churches were in Gloucester and King and Queen counties, Va. Further information about this individual or organization may be available in the Special Collections Research Center Wiki: \u003cextref href=\"http://scdbwiki.swem.wm.edu/wiki/index.php/Methodist_Church._Virginia_Conference._Richmond_District._Gloucester_Circuit.\" title=\"Methodist Church. Virginia Conference. Richmond District. Gloucester Circuit.\"\u003e\u003c/extref\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e"],"bioghist_heading_ssm":["Historical Note:"],"bioghist_tesim":["The Gloucester Circuit had six churches: Salem, Shackelford's, Bellamy's, Bethehem, Singleton's, and Olive Branch. The churches were in Gloucester and King and Queen counties, Va. Further information about this individual or organization may be available in the Special Collections Research Center Wiki:  ."],"prefercite_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eGloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church Records, Special Collections Research Center, Swem Library, College of William and Mary.\u003c/p\u003e"],"prefercite_tesim":["Gloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church Records, Special Collections Research Center, Swem Library, College of William and Mary."],"scopecontent_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003ePapers, 1825-1910, of the Gloucester Circuit of the Virginia Conference of the Methodist Church which covered Gloucester County and part of King and Queen County, Va. Includes minutes of quarterly conference meetings for the circuit; Sunday School class records; and building committee records.\u003c/p\u003e\n","\u003cp\u003e Acc. 2003.16 is a photocopy of a register, 1879-1885, of baptisms, marriages and members. Acc. 2012.382 is a register of members of the Gloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church, 1835-1837. The first page of the register says that there were 930 white members and 19 \"coloured\" members for a total of 949. There are also notes next to the names of some of the members, which include such information as marriage dates, death dates, and positions held in the church hierarchy.\u003c/p\u003e"],"scopecontent_heading_ssm":["Scope and Contents"],"scopecontent_tesim":["Papers, 1825-1910, of the Gloucester Circuit of the Virginia Conference of the Methodist Church which covered Gloucester County and part of King and Queen County, Va. Includes minutes of quarterly conference meetings for the circuit; Sunday School class records; and building committee records."," Acc. 2003.16 is a photocopy of a register, 1879-1885, of baptisms, marriages and members. Acc. 2012.382 is a register of members of the Gloucester Circuit of the Methodist Church, 1835-1837. The first page of the register says that there were 930 white members and 19 \"coloured\" members for a total of 949. There are also notes next to the names of some of the members, which include such information as marriage dates, death dates, and positions held in the church hierarchy."],"userestrict_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eBefore reproducing or quoting from any materials, in whole or in part, permission must be obtained from the Special Collections Research Center, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library.\u003c/p\u003e"],"userestrict_heading_ssm":["Conditions Governing Use:"],"userestrict_tesim":["Before reproducing or quoting from any materials, in whole or in part, permission must be obtained from the Special Collections Research Center, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library."],"names_ssim":["Special Collections Research Center","Methodist Church. Virginia Conference. Richmond District. Gloucester Circuit."],"corpname_ssim":["Special Collections Research Center","Methodist Church. Virginia Conference. Richmond District. Gloucester Circuit."],"language_ssim":["English"],"total_component_count_is":101,"online_item_count_is":0,"component_level_isim":[0],"sort_isi":0,"timestamp":"2026-04-30T22:04:04.216Z"}]}},"label":"Breadcrumbs"}}},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viw_repositories_2_resources_739_c01_c02"}},{"id":"viu_viu00917_c01_c25_c02","type":"Subseries","attributes":{"title":"B. Furnaces; includes numbered series,\n                     1-7","breadcrumbs":{"id":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viu_viu00917_c01_c25_c02#breadcrumbs","type":"document_value","attributes":{"value":{"ref_ssi":"viu_viu00917_c01_c25_c02","ref_ssm":["viu_viu00917_c01_c25_c02"],"id":"viu_viu00917_c01_c25_c02","ead_ssi":"viu_viu00917","_root_":"viu_viu00917","_nest_parent_":"viu_viu00917_c01_c25","parent_ssi":"viu_viu00917_c01_c25","parent_ssim":["viu_viu00917","viu_viu00917_c01","viu_viu00917_c01_c25"],"parent_ids_ssim":["viu_viu00917","viu_viu00917_c01","viu_viu00917_c01_c25"],"parent_unittitles_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Scrip Books"],"parent_unittitles_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Scrip Books"],"text":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Scrip Books","B. Furnaces; includes numbered series,\n                     1-7","10 volumes"],"title_filing_ssi":"B. Furnaces; includes numbered series,\n                     1-7","title_ssm":["B. Furnaces; includes numbered series,\n                     1-7"],"title_tesim":["B. Furnaces; includes numbered series,\n                     1-7"],"unitdate_other_ssim":["1881-1917"],"normalized_date_ssm":["1881/1917"],"normalized_title_ssm":["B. Furnaces; includes numbered series,\n                     1-7"],"component_level_isim":[3],"repository_ssim":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"collection_ssim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"physdesc_tesim":["10 volumes"],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"child_component_count_isi":0,"level_ssm":["Subseries"],"level_ssim":["Subseries"],"sort_isi":126,"date_range_isim":[1881,1882,1883,1884,1885,1886,1887,1888,1889,1890,1891,1892,1893,1894,1895,1896,1897,1898,1899,1900,1901,1902,1903,1904,1905,1906,1907,1908,1909,1910,1911,1912,1913,1914,1915,1916,1917],"_nest_path_":"/components#0/components#24/components#1","timestamp":"2026-05-01T02:17:12.165Z","collection":{"numFound":1,"start":0,"numFoundExact":true,"docs":[{"id":"viu_viu00917","ead_ssi":"viu_viu00917","_root_":"viu_viu00917","_nest_parent_":"viu_viu00917","ead_source_url_ssi":"data/uva-sc/viu00917.xml","title_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"title_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"level_ssm":["collection"],"level_ssim":["Collection"],"unitid_ssm":["662"],"text":["662","Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","95 linear feer + 1200\n         volumes","The word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.","As noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.","The first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.","These steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.","Some consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.","A certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project.","The Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.","Coal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.","The towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.","In the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.","The Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.","Perhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026 O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026 O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"","The problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n          To Mr. George Wickes \n             Supt. of Mines \n             Kay Moor, Virginia \n             Dear George, \n             Tony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success. Signed, \n             Ed D. Wickes Supt. of Mines Low Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.","Low Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.","The Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"","When America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.","The Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.","Why did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n          Manufacturers Record dated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.","During the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.","In examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.","Low Moor Iron Company Personnel:","Executive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.","Factory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919.","The Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.","This material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers.","English"],"unitid_tesim":["662"],"normalized_title_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"collection_title_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"collection_ssim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"repository_ssm":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"repository_ssim":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"acqinfo_ssim":["This collection was purchased from Green Bookman in\n            1939."],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"physdesc_tesim":["95 linear feer + 1200\n         volumes"],"arrangement_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThese steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSome consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project.\u003c/p\u003e"],"arrangement_heading_ssm":["Organization"],"arrangement_tesim":["The word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.","As noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.","The first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.","These steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.","Some consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.","A certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project."],"bioghist_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCoal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePerhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026amp; O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026amp; O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n         \u003cblockquote\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo Mr. George Wickes \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eSupt. of Mines \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eKay Moor, Virginia \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDear George, \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eTony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSigned, \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eEd D. Wickes Supt. of Mines\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/blockquote\u003eLow Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLow Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWhen America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWhy did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n         \u003cbibref type=\"simple\" href=\"\"\u003e\u003ctitle type=\"simple\" href=\"\"\u003eManufacturers Record\u003c/title\u003e\u003c/bibref\u003edated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDuring the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLow Moor Iron Company Personnel:\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eExecutive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFactory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919.\u003c/p\u003e"],"bioghist_heading_ssm":["Biographical/Historical Information"],"bioghist_tesim":["The Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.","Coal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.","The towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.","In the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.","The Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.","Perhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026 O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026 O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"","The problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n          To Mr. George Wickes \n             Supt. of Mines \n             Kay Moor, Virginia \n             Dear George, \n             Tony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success. Signed, \n             Ed D. Wickes Supt. of Mines Low Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.","Low Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.","The Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"","When America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.","The Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.","Why did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n          Manufacturers Record dated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.","During the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.","In examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.","Low Moor Iron Company Personnel:","Executive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.","Factory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919."],"scopecontent_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThis material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers.\u003c/p\u003e"],"scopecontent_heading_ssm":["Scope and Content Information"],"scopecontent_tesim":["The Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.","This material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers."],"language_ssim":["English"],"total_component_count_is":1879,"online_item_count_is":0,"component_level_isim":[0],"sort_isi":0,"timestamp":"2026-05-01T02:17:12.165Z"}]}},"label":"Breadcrumbs"}}},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viu_viu00917_c01_c25_c02"}},{"id":"viu_viu00917_c01_c26_c02","type":"Subseries","attributes":{"title":"B. Furnace Stock Receipts,\n                     2-[9]","breadcrumbs":{"id":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viu_viu00917_c01_c26_c02#breadcrumbs","type":"document_value","attributes":{"value":{"ref_ssi":"viu_viu00917_c01_c26_c02","ref_ssm":["viu_viu00917_c01_c26_c02"],"id":"viu_viu00917_c01_c26_c02","ead_ssi":"viu_viu00917","_root_":"viu_viu00917","_nest_parent_":"viu_viu00917_c01_c26","parent_ssi":"viu_viu00917_c01_c26","parent_ssim":["viu_viu00917","viu_viu00917_c01","viu_viu00917_c01_c26"],"parent_ids_ssim":["viu_viu00917","viu_viu00917_c01","viu_viu00917_c01_c26"],"parent_unittitles_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Shipments-Incoming"],"parent_unittitles_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Shipments-Incoming"],"text":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Shipments-Incoming","B. Furnace Stock Receipts,\n                     2-[9]","9 volumes"],"title_filing_ssi":"B. Furnace Stock Receipts,\n                     2-[9]","title_ssm":["B. Furnace Stock Receipts,\n                     2-[9]"],"title_tesim":["B. Furnace Stock Receipts,\n                     2-[9]"],"unitdate_other_ssim":["1881-1898"],"normalized_date_ssm":["1881/1898"],"normalized_title_ssm":["B. Furnace Stock Receipts,\n                     2-[9]"],"component_level_isim":[3],"repository_ssim":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"collection_ssim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"physdesc_tesim":["9 volumes"],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"child_component_count_isi":0,"level_ssm":["Subseries"],"level_ssim":["Subseries"],"sort_isi":140,"date_range_isim":[1881,1882,1883,1884,1885,1886,1887,1888,1889,1890,1891,1892,1893,1894,1895,1896,1897,1898],"_nest_path_":"/components#0/components#25/components#1","timestamp":"2026-05-01T02:17:12.165Z","collection":{"numFound":1,"start":0,"numFoundExact":true,"docs":[{"id":"viu_viu00917","ead_ssi":"viu_viu00917","_root_":"viu_viu00917","_nest_parent_":"viu_viu00917","ead_source_url_ssi":"data/uva-sc/viu00917.xml","title_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"title_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"level_ssm":["collection"],"level_ssim":["Collection"],"unitid_ssm":["662"],"text":["662","Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","95 linear feer + 1200\n         volumes","The word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.","As noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.","The first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.","These steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.","Some consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.","A certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project.","The Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.","Coal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.","The towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.","In the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.","The Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.","Perhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026 O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026 O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"","The problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n          To Mr. George Wickes \n             Supt. of Mines \n             Kay Moor, Virginia \n             Dear George, \n             Tony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success. Signed, \n             Ed D. Wickes Supt. of Mines Low Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.","Low Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.","The Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"","When America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.","The Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.","Why did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n          Manufacturers Record dated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.","During the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.","In examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.","Low Moor Iron Company Personnel:","Executive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.","Factory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919.","The Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.","This material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers.","English"],"unitid_tesim":["662"],"normalized_title_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"collection_title_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"collection_ssim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"repository_ssm":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"repository_ssim":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"acqinfo_ssim":["This collection was purchased from Green Bookman in\n            1939."],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"physdesc_tesim":["95 linear feer + 1200\n         volumes"],"arrangement_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThese steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSome consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project.\u003c/p\u003e"],"arrangement_heading_ssm":["Organization"],"arrangement_tesim":["The word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.","As noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.","The first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.","These steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.","Some consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.","A certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project."],"bioghist_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCoal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePerhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026amp; O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026amp; O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n         \u003cblockquote\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo Mr. George Wickes \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eSupt. of Mines \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eKay Moor, Virginia \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDear George, \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eTony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSigned, \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eEd D. Wickes Supt. of Mines\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/blockquote\u003eLow Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLow Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWhen America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWhy did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n         \u003cbibref type=\"simple\" href=\"\"\u003e\u003ctitle type=\"simple\" href=\"\"\u003eManufacturers Record\u003c/title\u003e\u003c/bibref\u003edated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDuring the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLow Moor Iron Company Personnel:\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eExecutive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFactory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919.\u003c/p\u003e"],"bioghist_heading_ssm":["Biographical/Historical Information"],"bioghist_tesim":["The Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.","Coal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.","The towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.","In the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.","The Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.","Perhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026 O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026 O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"","The problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n          To Mr. George Wickes \n             Supt. of Mines \n             Kay Moor, Virginia \n             Dear George, \n             Tony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success. Signed, \n             Ed D. Wickes Supt. of Mines Low Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.","Low Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.","The Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"","When America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.","The Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.","Why did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n          Manufacturers Record dated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.","During the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.","In examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.","Low Moor Iron Company Personnel:","Executive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.","Factory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919."],"scopecontent_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThis material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers.\u003c/p\u003e"],"scopecontent_heading_ssm":["Scope and Content Information"],"scopecontent_tesim":["The Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.","This material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers."],"language_ssim":["English"],"total_component_count_is":1879,"online_item_count_is":0,"component_level_isim":[0],"sort_isi":0,"timestamp":"2026-05-01T02:17:12.165Z"}]}},"label":"Breadcrumbs"}}},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viu_viu00917_c01_c26_c02"}},{"id":"viu_viu00917_c01_c20_c02","type":"Subseries","attributes":{"title":"B. Miscellaneous; includes production\n                     records, accounts, iron and coke use records,\n                     orders, pig iron analysis, blast records, and\n                     sintering plant records","breadcrumbs":{"id":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viu_viu00917_c01_c20_c02#breadcrumbs","type":"document_value","attributes":{"value":{"ref_ssi":"viu_viu00917_c01_c20_c02","ref_ssm":["viu_viu00917_c01_c20_c02"],"id":"viu_viu00917_c01_c20_c02","ead_ssi":"viu_viu00917","_root_":"viu_viu00917","_nest_parent_":"viu_viu00917_c01_c20","parent_ssi":"viu_viu00917_c01_c20","parent_ssim":["viu_viu00917","viu_viu00917_c01","viu_viu00917_c01_c20"],"parent_ids_ssim":["viu_viu00917","viu_viu00917_c01","viu_viu00917_c01_c20"],"parent_unittitles_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Operations-Furnaces"],"parent_unittitles_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Operations-Furnaces"],"text":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Operations-Furnaces","B. Miscellaneous; includes production\n                     records, accounts, iron and coke use records,\n                     orders, pig iron analysis, blast records, and\n                     sintering plant records","13 volumes"],"title_filing_ssi":"B. Miscellaneous; includes production\n                     records, accounts, iron and coke use records,\n                     orders, pig iron analysis, blast records, and\n                     sintering plant records","title_ssm":["B. Miscellaneous; includes production\n                     records, accounts, iron and coke use records,\n                     orders, pig iron analysis, blast records, and\n                     sintering plant records"],"title_tesim":["B. Miscellaneous; includes production\n                     records, accounts, iron and coke use records,\n                     orders, pig iron analysis, blast records, and\n                     sintering plant records"],"unitdate_other_ssim":["1880-1925"],"normalized_date_ssm":["1880/1925"],"normalized_title_ssm":["B. Miscellaneous; includes production\n                     records, accounts, iron and coke use records,\n                     orders, pig iron analysis, blast records, and\n                     sintering plant records"],"component_level_isim":[3],"repository_ssim":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"collection_ssim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"physdesc_tesim":["13 volumes"],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"child_component_count_isi":0,"level_ssm":["Subseries"],"level_ssim":["Subseries"],"sort_isi":108,"date_range_isim":[1880,1881,1882,1883,1884,1885,1886,1887,1888,1889,1890,1891,1892,1893,1894,1895,1896,1897,1898,1899,1900,1901,1902,1903,1904,1905,1906,1907,1908,1909,1910,1911,1912,1913,1914,1915,1916,1917,1918,1919,1920,1921,1922,1923,1924,1925],"_nest_path_":"/components#0/components#19/components#1","timestamp":"2026-05-01T02:17:12.165Z","collection":{"numFound":1,"start":0,"numFoundExact":true,"docs":[{"id":"viu_viu00917","ead_ssi":"viu_viu00917","_root_":"viu_viu00917","_nest_parent_":"viu_viu00917","ead_source_url_ssi":"data/uva-sc/viu00917.xml","title_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"title_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"level_ssm":["collection"],"level_ssim":["Collection"],"unitid_ssm":["662"],"text":["662","Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","95 linear feer + 1200\n         volumes","The word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.","As noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.","The first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.","These steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.","Some consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.","A certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project.","The Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.","Coal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.","The towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.","In the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.","The Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.","Perhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026 O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026 O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"","The problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n          To Mr. George Wickes \n             Supt. of Mines \n             Kay Moor, Virginia \n             Dear George, \n             Tony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success. Signed, \n             Ed D. Wickes Supt. of Mines Low Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.","Low Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.","The Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"","When America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.","The Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.","Why did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n          Manufacturers Record dated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.","During the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.","In examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.","Low Moor Iron Company Personnel:","Executive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.","Factory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919.","The Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.","This material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers.","English"],"unitid_tesim":["662"],"normalized_title_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"collection_title_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"collection_ssim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"repository_ssm":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"repository_ssim":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"acqinfo_ssim":["This collection was purchased from Green Bookman in\n            1939."],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"physdesc_tesim":["95 linear feer + 1200\n         volumes"],"arrangement_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThese steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSome consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project.\u003c/p\u003e"],"arrangement_heading_ssm":["Organization"],"arrangement_tesim":["The word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.","As noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.","The first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.","These steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.","Some consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.","A certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project."],"bioghist_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCoal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePerhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026amp; O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026amp; O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n         \u003cblockquote\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo Mr. George Wickes \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eSupt. of Mines \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eKay Moor, Virginia \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDear George, \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eTony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSigned, \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eEd D. Wickes Supt. of Mines\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/blockquote\u003eLow Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLow Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWhen America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWhy did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n         \u003cbibref type=\"simple\" href=\"\"\u003e\u003ctitle type=\"simple\" href=\"\"\u003eManufacturers Record\u003c/title\u003e\u003c/bibref\u003edated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDuring the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLow Moor Iron Company Personnel:\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eExecutive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFactory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919.\u003c/p\u003e"],"bioghist_heading_ssm":["Biographical/Historical Information"],"bioghist_tesim":["The Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.","Coal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.","The towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.","In the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.","The Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.","Perhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026 O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026 O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"","The problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n          To Mr. George Wickes \n             Supt. of Mines \n             Kay Moor, Virginia \n             Dear George, \n             Tony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success. Signed, \n             Ed D. Wickes Supt. of Mines Low Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.","Low Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.","The Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"","When America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.","The Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.","Why did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n          Manufacturers Record dated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.","During the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.","In examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.","Low Moor Iron Company Personnel:","Executive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.","Factory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919."],"scopecontent_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThis material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers.\u003c/p\u003e"],"scopecontent_heading_ssm":["Scope and Content Information"],"scopecontent_tesim":["The Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.","This material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers."],"language_ssim":["English"],"total_component_count_is":1879,"online_item_count_is":0,"component_level_isim":[0],"sort_isi":0,"timestamp":"2026-05-01T02:17:12.165Z"}]}},"label":"Breadcrumbs"}}},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viu_viu00917_c01_c20_c02"}},{"id":"viu_viu00917_c01_c07_c02","type":"Subseries","attributes":{"title":"B. National Bank of\n                     Commerce","breadcrumbs":{"id":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viu_viu00917_c01_c07_c02#breadcrumbs","type":"document_value","attributes":{"value":{"ref_ssi":"viu_viu00917_c01_c07_c02","ref_ssm":["viu_viu00917_c01_c07_c02"],"id":"viu_viu00917_c01_c07_c02","ead_ssi":"viu_viu00917","_root_":"viu_viu00917","_nest_parent_":"viu_viu00917_c01_c07","parent_ssi":"viu_viu00917_c01_c07","parent_ssim":["viu_viu00917","viu_viu00917_c01","viu_viu00917_c01_c07"],"parent_ids_ssim":["viu_viu00917","viu_viu00917_c01","viu_viu00917_c01_c07"],"parent_unittitles_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Check Stub"],"parent_unittitles_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Check Stub"],"text":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Check Stub","B. National Bank of\n                     Commerce","7 volumes"],"title_filing_ssi":"B. National Bank of\n                     Commerce","title_ssm":["B. National Bank of\n                     Commerce"],"title_tesim":["B. National Bank of\n                     Commerce"],"unitdate_other_ssim":["1879-1895"],"normalized_date_ssm":["1879/1895"],"normalized_title_ssm":["B. National Bank of\n                     Commerce"],"component_level_isim":[3],"repository_ssim":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"collection_ssim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"physdesc_tesim":["7 volumes"],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"child_component_count_isi":0,"level_ssm":["Subseries"],"level_ssim":["Subseries"],"sort_isi":26,"date_range_isim":[1879,1880,1881,1882,1883,1884,1885,1886,1887,1888,1889,1890,1891,1892,1893,1894,1895],"_nest_path_":"/components#0/components#6/components#1","timestamp":"2026-05-01T02:17:12.165Z","collection":{"numFound":1,"start":0,"numFoundExact":true,"docs":[{"id":"viu_viu00917","ead_ssi":"viu_viu00917","_root_":"viu_viu00917","_nest_parent_":"viu_viu00917","ead_source_url_ssi":"data/uva-sc/viu00917.xml","title_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"title_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"level_ssm":["collection"],"level_ssim":["Collection"],"unitid_ssm":["662"],"text":["662","Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","95 linear feer + 1200\n         volumes","The word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.","As noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.","The first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.","These steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.","Some consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.","A certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project.","The Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.","Coal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.","The towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.","In the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.","The Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.","Perhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026 O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026 O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"","The problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n          To Mr. George Wickes \n             Supt. of Mines \n             Kay Moor, Virginia \n             Dear George, \n             Tony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success. Signed, \n             Ed D. Wickes Supt. of Mines Low Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.","Low Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.","The Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"","When America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.","The Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.","Why did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n          Manufacturers Record dated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.","During the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.","In examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.","Low Moor Iron Company Personnel:","Executive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.","Factory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919.","The Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.","This material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers.","English"],"unitid_tesim":["662"],"normalized_title_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"collection_title_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"collection_ssim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"repository_ssm":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"repository_ssim":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"acqinfo_ssim":["This collection was purchased from Green Bookman in\n            1939."],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"physdesc_tesim":["95 linear feer + 1200\n         volumes"],"arrangement_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThese steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSome consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project.\u003c/p\u003e"],"arrangement_heading_ssm":["Organization"],"arrangement_tesim":["The word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.","As noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.","The first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.","These steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.","Some consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.","A certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project."],"bioghist_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCoal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePerhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026amp; O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026amp; O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n         \u003cblockquote\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo Mr. George Wickes \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eSupt. of Mines \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eKay Moor, Virginia \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDear George, \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eTony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSigned, \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eEd D. Wickes Supt. of Mines\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/blockquote\u003eLow Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLow Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWhen America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWhy did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n         \u003cbibref type=\"simple\" href=\"\"\u003e\u003ctitle type=\"simple\" href=\"\"\u003eManufacturers Record\u003c/title\u003e\u003c/bibref\u003edated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDuring the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLow Moor Iron Company Personnel:\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eExecutive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFactory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919.\u003c/p\u003e"],"bioghist_heading_ssm":["Biographical/Historical Information"],"bioghist_tesim":["The Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.","Coal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.","The towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.","In the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.","The Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.","Perhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026 O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026 O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"","The problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n          To Mr. George Wickes \n             Supt. of Mines \n             Kay Moor, Virginia \n             Dear George, \n             Tony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success. Signed, \n             Ed D. Wickes Supt. of Mines Low Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.","Low Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.","The Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"","When America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.","The Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.","Why did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n          Manufacturers Record dated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.","During the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.","In examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.","Low Moor Iron Company Personnel:","Executive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.","Factory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919."],"scopecontent_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThis material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers.\u003c/p\u003e"],"scopecontent_heading_ssm":["Scope and Content Information"],"scopecontent_tesim":["The Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.","This material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers."],"language_ssim":["English"],"total_component_count_is":1879,"online_item_count_is":0,"component_level_isim":[0],"sort_isi":0,"timestamp":"2026-05-01T02:17:12.165Z"}]}},"label":"Breadcrumbs"}}},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viu_viu00917_c01_c07_c02"}},{"id":"viu_viu00917_c01_c13_c02","type":"Subseries","attributes":{"title":"B. Numbered Sequence; #1, 2, 4, 5,\n                     7","breadcrumbs":{"id":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viu_viu00917_c01_c13_c02#breadcrumbs","type":"document_value","attributes":{"value":{"ref_ssi":"viu_viu00917_c01_c13_c02","ref_ssm":["viu_viu00917_c01_c13_c02"],"id":"viu_viu00917_c01_c13_c02","ead_ssi":"viu_viu00917","_root_":"viu_viu00917","_nest_parent_":"viu_viu00917_c01_c13","parent_ssi":"viu_viu00917_c01_c13","parent_ssim":["viu_viu00917","viu_viu00917_c01","viu_viu00917_c01_c13"],"parent_ids_ssim":["viu_viu00917","viu_viu00917_c01","viu_viu00917_c01_c13"],"parent_unittitles_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Journals"],"parent_unittitles_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Journals"],"text":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Journals","B. Numbered Sequence; #1, 2, 4, 5,\n                     7","5 volumes"],"title_filing_ssi":"B. Numbered Sequence; #1, 2, 4, 5,\n                     7","title_ssm":["B. Numbered Sequence; #1, 2, 4, 5,\n                     7"],"title_tesim":["B. Numbered Sequence; #1, 2, 4, 5,\n                     7"],"unitdate_other_ssim":["1879-1924"],"normalized_date_ssm":["1879/1924"],"normalized_title_ssm":["B. Numbered Sequence; #1, 2, 4, 5,\n                     7"],"component_level_isim":[3],"repository_ssim":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"collection_ssim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"physdesc_tesim":["5 volumes"],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"child_component_count_isi":0,"level_ssm":["Subseries"],"level_ssim":["Subseries"],"sort_isi":60,"date_range_isim":[1879,1880,1881,1882,1883,1884,1885,1886,1887,1888,1889,1890,1891,1892,1893,1894,1895,1896,1897,1898,1899,1900,1901,1902,1903,1904,1905,1906,1907,1908,1909,1910,1911,1912,1913,1914,1915,1916,1917,1918,1919,1920,1921,1922,1923,1924],"_nest_path_":"/components#0/components#12/components#1","timestamp":"2026-05-01T02:17:12.165Z","collection":{"numFound":1,"start":0,"numFoundExact":true,"docs":[{"id":"viu_viu00917","ead_ssi":"viu_viu00917","_root_":"viu_viu00917","_nest_parent_":"viu_viu00917","ead_source_url_ssi":"data/uva-sc/viu00917.xml","title_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"title_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"level_ssm":["collection"],"level_ssim":["Collection"],"unitid_ssm":["662"],"text":["662","Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","95 linear feer + 1200\n         volumes","The word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.","As noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.","The first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.","These steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.","Some consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.","A certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project.","The Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.","Coal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.","The towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.","In the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.","The Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.","Perhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026 O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026 O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"","The problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n          To Mr. George Wickes \n             Supt. of Mines \n             Kay Moor, Virginia \n             Dear George, \n             Tony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success. Signed, \n             Ed D. Wickes Supt. of Mines Low Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.","Low Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.","The Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"","When America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.","The Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.","Why did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n          Manufacturers Record dated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.","During the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.","In examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.","Low Moor Iron Company Personnel:","Executive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.","Factory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919.","The Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.","This material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers.","English"],"unitid_tesim":["662"],"normalized_title_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"collection_title_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"collection_ssim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"repository_ssm":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"repository_ssim":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"acqinfo_ssim":["This collection was purchased from Green Bookman in\n            1939."],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"physdesc_tesim":["95 linear feer + 1200\n         volumes"],"arrangement_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThese steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSome consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project.\u003c/p\u003e"],"arrangement_heading_ssm":["Organization"],"arrangement_tesim":["The word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.","As noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.","The first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.","These steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.","Some consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.","A certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project."],"bioghist_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCoal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePerhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026amp; O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026amp; O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n         \u003cblockquote\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo Mr. George Wickes \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eSupt. of Mines \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eKay Moor, Virginia \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDear George, \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eTony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSigned, \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eEd D. Wickes Supt. of Mines\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/blockquote\u003eLow Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLow Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWhen America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWhy did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n         \u003cbibref type=\"simple\" href=\"\"\u003e\u003ctitle type=\"simple\" href=\"\"\u003eManufacturers Record\u003c/title\u003e\u003c/bibref\u003edated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDuring the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLow Moor Iron Company Personnel:\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eExecutive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFactory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919.\u003c/p\u003e"],"bioghist_heading_ssm":["Biographical/Historical Information"],"bioghist_tesim":["The Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.","Coal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.","The towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.","In the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.","The Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.","Perhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026 O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026 O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"","The problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n          To Mr. George Wickes \n             Supt. of Mines \n             Kay Moor, Virginia \n             Dear George, \n             Tony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success. Signed, \n             Ed D. Wickes Supt. of Mines Low Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.","Low Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.","The Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"","When America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.","The Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.","Why did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n          Manufacturers Record dated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.","During the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.","In examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.","Low Moor Iron Company Personnel:","Executive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.","Factory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919."],"scopecontent_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThis material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers.\u003c/p\u003e"],"scopecontent_heading_ssm":["Scope and Content Information"],"scopecontent_tesim":["The Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.","This material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers."],"language_ssim":["English"],"total_component_count_is":1879,"online_item_count_is":0,"component_level_isim":[0],"sort_isi":0,"timestamp":"2026-05-01T02:17:12.165Z"}]}},"label":"Breadcrumbs"}}},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viu_viu00917_c01_c13_c02"}},{"id":"viu_viu00917_c01_c15_c02","type":"Subseries","attributes":{"title":"B. Numbered Sequence; #1, 2, 4, 5,\n                     7","breadcrumbs":{"id":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viu_viu00917_c01_c15_c02#breadcrumbs","type":"document_value","attributes":{"value":{"ref_ssi":"viu_viu00917_c01_c15_c02","ref_ssm":["viu_viu00917_c01_c15_c02"],"id":"viu_viu00917_c01_c15_c02","ead_ssi":"viu_viu00917","_root_":"viu_viu00917","_nest_parent_":"viu_viu00917_c01_c15","parent_ssi":"viu_viu00917_c01_c15","parent_ssim":["viu_viu00917","viu_viu00917_c01","viu_viu00917_c01_c15"],"parent_ids_ssim":["viu_viu00917","viu_viu00917_c01","viu_viu00917_c01_c15"],"parent_unittitles_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Letter Books"],"parent_unittitles_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Letter Books"],"text":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","Bound Volumes","Letter Books","B. Numbered Sequence; #1, 2, 4, 5,\n                     7","5 volumes"],"title_filing_ssi":"B. Numbered Sequence; #1, 2, 4, 5,\n                     7","title_ssm":["B. Numbered Sequence; #1, 2, 4, 5,\n                     7"],"title_tesim":["B. Numbered Sequence; #1, 2, 4, 5,\n                     7"],"unitdate_other_ssim":["1879-1924"],"normalized_date_ssm":["1879/1924"],"normalized_title_ssm":["B. Numbered Sequence; #1, 2, 4, 5,\n                     7"],"component_level_isim":[3],"repository_ssim":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"collection_ssim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"physdesc_tesim":["5 volumes"],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"child_component_count_isi":0,"level_ssm":["Subseries"],"level_ssim":["Subseries"],"sort_isi":74,"date_range_isim":[1879,1880,1881,1882,1883,1884,1885,1886,1887,1888,1889,1890,1891,1892,1893,1894,1895,1896,1897,1898,1899,1900,1901,1902,1903,1904,1905,1906,1907,1908,1909,1910,1911,1912,1913,1914,1915,1916,1917,1918,1919,1920,1921,1922,1923,1924],"_nest_path_":"/components#0/components#14/components#1","timestamp":"2026-05-01T02:17:12.165Z","collection":{"numFound":1,"start":0,"numFoundExact":true,"docs":[{"id":"viu_viu00917","ead_ssi":"viu_viu00917","_root_":"viu_viu00917","_nest_parent_":"viu_viu00917","ead_source_url_ssi":"data/uva-sc/viu00917.xml","title_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"title_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"level_ssm":["collection"],"level_ssim":["Collection"],"unitid_ssm":["662"],"text":["662","Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927","95 linear feer + 1200\n         volumes","The word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.","As noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.","The first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.","These steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.","Some consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.","A certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project.","The Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.","Coal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.","The towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.","In the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.","The Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.","Perhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026 O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026 O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"","The problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n          To Mr. George Wickes \n             Supt. of Mines \n             Kay Moor, Virginia \n             Dear George, \n             Tony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success. Signed, \n             Ed D. Wickes Supt. of Mines Low Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.","Low Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.","The Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"","When America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.","The Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.","Why did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n          Manufacturers Record dated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.","During the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.","In examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.","Low Moor Iron Company Personnel:","Executive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.","Factory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919.","The Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.","This material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers.","English"],"unitid_tesim":["662"],"normalized_title_ssm":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"collection_title_tesim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"collection_ssim":["Papers of the Low Moor Iron Company \n          1873-1927"],"repository_ssm":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"repository_ssim":["University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept."],"acqinfo_ssim":["This collection was purchased from Green Bookman in\n            1939."],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"physdesc_tesim":["95 linear feer + 1200\n         volumes"],"arrangement_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThese steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSome consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project.\u003c/p\u003e"],"arrangement_heading_ssm":["Organization"],"arrangement_tesim":["The word \"organization\" is used here with considerable\n         diffidence, for any researcher studying the container list\n         that follows will realize quickly that there is no\n         organization in the usual sense of the word.","As noted under \"Provenance,\" the Low Moor Iron Company\n         papers were subjected to a number of moves; when processing\n         began in the fall of 1976, no discernible scheme of\n         organization could be determined.","The first step was to review the series of coded numbers\n         placed on the bundles of papers before they were moved to\n         the dormitory attic, but these did not provide any sort of\n         useful organization. Next, the spine titles of the original\n         letter boxes were reviewed (they had been copied onto the\n         gray cardboard sheets before the move to the dormitory\n         attic), but they, too, proved useless.","These steps having provided no scheme, and after a\n         considerable hiatus due to a turnover in student processors\n         on the collection, the new student processors were\n         instructed to begin a box-by-box inventory of the contents\n         of the collection. During this inventory, old folders were\n         replaced with acid-free ones, and the original folder\n         headings were copied onto the new ones. Some removal of\n         paper clips was accomplished, and the materials were\n         reviewed and notes taken for the guide.","Some consolidation of materials was accomplished, and in\n         other cases, materials were moved. This work has created\n         some problems in the numbering of the boxes. Thus, the\n         researchers will find boxes marked \"6A\" and \"23C\"; he will\n         also discover that certain box numbers have been entirely\n         omitted. As the box numbers exist only to aid in the\n         location of material, it was not felt that the unusual\n         numbers and the omissions would cause problems in working\n         with the papers.","A certain amount of movement of boxes within the\n         collection, and of materials among boxes, probably would\n         ease use of it. But what processing was accomplished on\n         this project took far longer than had been anticipated, and\n         there was no time in the late spring of 1978, when the\n         processors had to complete their work with the project, to\n         undertake a mass movement of material. Thus, they stand in\n         the order in which we found them at the beginning of the\n         project."],"bioghist_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCoal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePerhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026amp; O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026amp; O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n         \u003cblockquote\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo Mr. George Wickes \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eSupt. of Mines \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eKay Moor, Virginia \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDear George, \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eTony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSigned, \n            \u003clb\u003e\u003c/lb\u003eEd D. Wickes Supt. of Mines\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/blockquote\u003eLow Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLow Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWhen America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWhy did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n         \u003cbibref type=\"simple\" href=\"\"\u003e\u003ctitle type=\"simple\" href=\"\"\u003eManufacturers Record\u003c/title\u003e\u003c/bibref\u003edated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDuring the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLow Moor Iron Company Personnel:\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eExecutive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFactory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919.\u003c/p\u003e"],"bioghist_heading_ssm":["Biographical/Historical Information"],"bioghist_tesim":["The Low Moor Iron Company, the first producer of pig\n         iron in Virginia according to the company's claims, was a\n         self-contained manufacturing unit producing from its own\n         mines the coal, limestone, and iron ore needed for its iron\n         production. Located in Low Moor near Clifton Forge in\n         Alleghany County in western Virginia, an area rich in\n         mineral deposits, the company was in operation from\n         1872-1930, producing only pig iron; it never attempted to\n         produce finished iron products.","Coal came to the Low Moor furnaces from the Kay Moor\n         Mines at Kay Moor, West Virginia, about thirty miles from\n         Low Moor; limestone was produced from the Low Moor\n         limestone quarries; and iron ore came from the Fenwick,\n         Dolly Ann, Jordan, Rich Patch, Low Moor, and Longdale\n         Mines, most of them within twenty miles of Low Moor at\n         Covington or Clifton Forge.","The towns of Low Moor and Kay Moor were company towns in\n         every respect. Workers lived in company-owned houses,\n         bought food in company stores, worshiped at the company\n         church, saw movies in the company theater, were treated in\n         the company hospital, and were buried in the company\n         cemetery. Workers received part of their pay in scrip that\n         they exchanged for goods and services. According to a\n         statement from the Kay Moor Mines dated November 1904, Kay\n         Moor then employed 338 people, paid them an average wage of\n         $36.26 per month, and issued half of their pay in scrip.\n         Kay Moor had four stores; Low Moor had seven or eight. All\n         of these stores carried large inventories which are\n         detailed in the collection. These inventories are valuable\n         to anyone interested in determining the wants and needs of\n         a coal miner and his family.","In the late 1910's and 1920's Kay Moor had a company\n         theater called the Azure Theater which seated about 300\n         people. There were also plans for a company-owned social\n         center, to have pool tables, a soda fountain, and\n         provisions for dancing and skating. The company was in\n         tough economic straits by the 1920's, however, and there is\n         no evidence that the social center was built. The town of\n         Low Moor was so completely under the company's influence\n         that one of Low Moor Iron Company's assistant managers\n         served as the town sheriff. He often foreclosed on people\n         who did not pay their debts, and drove troublesome people\n         \"out of town on a rail\" as he put it.","The Low Moor Iron Company's fortunes fluctuated during\n         the various business cycles between the years 1880-1930.\n         Low Moor was one of the larger pig iron producers in\n         Virginia, but Virginia pig iron production was not\n         important nationally. Low Moor officials sometimes sold\n         their product themselves, but more often they used agents,\n         the prevalent method at the time. Low Moor Iron Company\n         used a variety of agents through the 1900's. James F. Bryan\n         acted as the exclusive agent for the sale of Kay Moor Coal\n         from September 21, 1903 to September, 1905. From about 1890\n         until about 1910 Dalton Nash and Company were the exclusive\n         eastern agents of Low Moor Iron. After that time the\n         exclusive agency went to Philips Isham and Company located\n         in New York. From about 1890 the western agency was handled\n         chiefly by Thomas Mack and Company. After 1902 Thomas Mack\n         and Company underwent a name change, becoming Walter\n         Wallingford and Company, with offices located in\n         Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Chicago.","Perhaps the Low Moor Iron Company's biggest problem over\n         the years was obtaining railroad cars for the\n         transportation of its finished product. Low Moor Iron\n         Company had its own cars for transporting its raw materials\n         among its various facilities. For the long haul necessary\n         for its finished goods, however, it depended upon the\n         services of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the\n         relationship was not always a happy one. The Low Moor\n         Company complained many times to the C \u0026 O Railroad\n         about the discrepancies between long-and shorthaul freight\n         rates. Low Moor also had trouble getting cars from the C\n         \u0026 O. In a letter to one of Low Moor Company's agents\n         from an irate customer dated 1898, the customer wrote: \"We\n         wrote you on Saturday and endeavored to question upon your\n         mind the necessity of taking care of us with Low Moor iron.\n         We are on our uppers--there is not a pound of Low Moor iron\n         in the yard. Of the one hundred tons ordered some time ago,\n         not one pound of it has been received.\" This was, according\n         to the Low Moor Iron Company, because they could not get\n         the railroad cars. In a letter from Thomas Mack and Company\n         dated November 26, 1901, to General Manager E. C. Means:\n         \"We are hopeful that the car supply will get better because\n         of the number of orders you have of ours for prompt\n         shipment. Our customers are complaining that they are not\n         getting the iron fast enough. . . . We hope that the\n         railroad will be able to supply you with empty cars.\" In\n         another letter dated 1916 to John B. Guernsey, then acting\n         General Manager of the Low Moor Iron Company, \"We were not\n         supplied with coke cars for today's loading, and\n         consequently we have been practically down of Kay Moor\n         ovens all day.\"","The problem of procuring labor also plagued the Low Moor\n         Company. The company sometimes tried to hire immigrant\n         laborers and send the men directly to Low Moor from New\n         York City. There were problems with this, as is explained\n         in the following letter dated April 7, 1906: \n          To Mr. George Wickes \n             Supt. of Mines \n             Kay Moor, Virginia \n             Dear George, \n             Tony arrived with twenty one men last night. One\n            got away in Jersey two in Washington D.C., four in\n            Charlottesville. Some of the men are very good looking,\n            but taken as a whole they are the worst lot I have ever\n            seen: Irish, German-Jews, and Italians. . . . Our New\n            York transportations to this place have never been a\n            success. Signed, \n             Ed D. Wickes Supt. of Mines Low Moor usually employed labor agencies, one\n         of which was Atwood's Employment Agency. Often the Low Moor\n         Company would request certain nationalities, believing them\n         to be better workers than others. Sometimes the company\n         would request a gang of twenty made up of \"ten Greeks and\n         ten Italians.\" Many of the immigrants fled Low Moor and Kay\n         Moor when they learned that they would have to work\n         underground. There is a fair amount of material on\n         immigrant labor and its procurement in the collection, and\n         it is noted in the description of the box contents.","Low Moor Iron Company not only had trouble procuring\n         labor, but it also had trouble with labor already employed\n         in the mines and at the factory. Labor dissension and\n         strikes troubled the Kay Moor Mines through the 1900's. The\n         great coal strike of 1902 hurt the Low Moor Company's coal\n         mining operation, but by 1903 things were \"nearly back to\n         normal\" according to the mine superintendent. There was\n         still trouble at Kay Moor Mines, however. In a letter dated\n         April 26, 1906, to the treasurer of Low Moor Company, the\n         manager of the mines wrote about the trouble in \"trying to\n         get the agitators out.\" The mines were seventy-five men\n         short of the total labor force needed because many of the\n         coal miners returned to their farms during the spring.\n         There were rumblings of another strike at Kay Moor, the\n         result of which was to be a fourteen percent increase in\n         wages for the Kay Moor Mine workers via an agreement with\n         the United Mine Workers Union in December.","The Low Moor Iron Company grew along with the rest of\n         Virginia industry in the 1890's and 1900's. Starting with\n         only one furnace in the 1870's, it opened a second furnace\n         at Covington, Virginia, in 1891. In 1911 it opened a third\n         furnace, this time at Low Moor. Covington, with its heavy\n         industry, soon became known as the \"Pittsburgh of\n         Virginia.\" Virginia's pig iron production rose from 9,000\n         short tons in 1870 to 544,034 long tons in 1903. Judging\n         from the Low Moor Company's correspondence, the most\n         prosperous period for the company fell between the years\n         1895-1907. In the years between 1907-1917 problems befell\n         the Virginia pig iron industry. In a letter from William W.\n         Hearns, the president of the Virginia based Princess Pig\n         Iron Company, to U. S. Senator Thomas S. Martin, Hearns\n         writes of the problems of the Virginia pig iron industry:\n         \"There is not a blast furnace in Virginia that is making\n         any money from the manufacture of pig iron. The cause of\n         this is there is an exceedingly low price on pig iron in\n         the country at the present time, and the increased cost of\n         manufacturing is due to the increase in wages in all\n         lines.\" With the outbreak of World War I prices rose\n         dramatically, but in a market report to Low Moor dated\n         November 11, 1916, it was stated that: \"In spite of the\n         high prices, it is not a picnic to be in the iron industry.\n         There is a desperate shortage of cars and equipment in the\n         coal and iron districts, and in consequence there are\n         troubles of all kinds to get materials shipped. The\n         situation has grown serious.\"","When America became involved in the First World War, it\n         meant a boost for the Low Moor Iron Company. The government\n         helped it procure labor, and even helped it repair its\n         furnaces. The problem of supplies and cars for their\n         shipments, however, plagued the company more than ever. It\n         had a good deal of trouble getting all the raw materials it\n         needed due chiefly to the \"tight ship\" run by Harry F.\n         Byrd, Sr., U.S. Fuel Administrator for Virginia. After the\n         war very serious problems began to trouble the Low Moor\n         Iron Company. The demand for iron fell precipitously and a\n         short but severe depression ensued from 1919-1922. The\n         depression seemed to hit the iron industry especially hard.\n         Prices took a huge drop due to the lack of demand, and many\n         pre-war contracts had to be revalued. To compound the\n         company's problems, the Kay Moor Mines went on strike in\n         1919. This strike was quickly settled, as the market for\n         coal was so good that the Low Moor Company ceased taking\n         orders temporarily in 1921 as it could not fill the orders\n         it had on hand.","The Low Moor Company furnaces lay idle for some twenty\n         months. Finally, in November 1922 one of Low Moor's\n         furnaces was finally fired up. While prosperity gradually\n         returned to the rest of the country, the Low Moor Iron\n         Company never recovered. Production of pig iron in the\n         Virginia iron industry declined from 544,034 tons in 1903\n         to 148,053 tons in 1923, considered a good year for the\n         industry as a whole. In February 1926 Low Moor officials\n         talked of merging with two other iron companies in order to\n         revive the iron business for the three companies. The\n         merger, however, never occurred. By late 1926 the company\n         was in the process of liquidation. An advertisement in the\n         Charleston, West Virginia, Daily Mail dated April 30, 1927,\n         told of a huge warehouse sale at the Low Moor Iron Company.\n         The advertisement noted \"thousands of screws, pipe\n         fittings, valves, etc.\" The last piece of correspondence\n         from the Low Moor Iron Company in the collection is dated\n         1929. It deals with the sale of a machine.","Why did the iron industry in Virginia decline as it did?\n         Some say that lack of speed, efficiency, and a decent\n         transportation system for Alleghany County caused it. In a\n         letter from C. E. Bertie, secretary of the Virginia Pig\n         Iron Association, to the \n          Manufacturers Record dated 1925, Bertie claimed that it was the\n         tremendous rise in the cost of transportation. Virginia, he\n         claimed, had almost no home market. Over 80% of its normal\n         production was shipped out to other states. The failure of\n         the Interstate Commerce Commission to treat Virginia\n         furnaces as southern furnaces was the cause of much of the\n         trouble. From 1914-1925 there were four blanket increases\n         in freight rates in the country, of which only one applied\n         equally to all localities. Southern furnaces were received\n         only two increases--a 25% increase in 1918 and a 25%\n         increase in 1920--but northern furnaces had had 5%, 15%,\n         25%, and 40% increases in their transportation costs.\n         Virginia furnaces, although recognized as southern\n         furnaces, had had freight rates increased in line with the\n         northern furnaces. Prior to the war Virginia iron reached\n         all points in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois on a\n         competitive basis with southern furnaces. After World War I\n         the advantage was limited to a small portion of\n         southeastern Ohio. All of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan\n         were now lost to the Virginia producers. The Virginia\n         producer, according to Bertie, felt that the freight rates\n         should be restored to a relationship with southern\n         furnaces. If what Bertie said was true, the other southern\n         states iron industries should not have been in the same\n         desperate economic straits as Virginia's, and statistics\n         should support this. In the 1920's production rose to new\n         heights in Alabama. In Tennessee, however, iron production\n         plunged to new lows during the 1920's. While the south\n         accounted for 10.2% of the entire U. S. production in the\n         years 1919-1924, Virginia accounted for less than 1% during\n         those years. In 1915 Virginia accounted for over 6% of the\n         U.S. iron production. One can see a decline in other areas\n         of the south than Virginia. While the discrepancies in the\n         freight rates may have helped cause the decline, clearly\n         there are other reasons.","During the 1900's there was a discovery of extremely\n         rich iron ore deposits in the mid-west. Much of this ore\n         was on or near the surface, making the mining of it both\n         easy and inexpensive. This in turn lowered production costs\n         of the pig iron. This caused iron production to shift to\n         that region, and resulted in a decline in the Virginia iron\n         industry. There was a sharp increase in iron production in\n         the mid-west through the 1920's. The iron ore in the\n         mid-west may have been of better quality than Virginia, but\n         the iron ore in Virginia was of sufficient quality to\n         produce a good pig iron. The western ore deposits were not\n         as conveniently located as Virginia deposits, but the\n         inexpensiveness of production more than made up for it.","In examining the rise and fall of the Low Moor Iron\n         Company, we can see a situation in which the conditions for\n         the manufacture of iron were nearly ideal. There was plenty\n         of land for expansion and resources for the manufacture of\n         the iron. The major internal problem faced by the Low Moor\n         Iron Company was that of transportation. External\n         developments, however, caused the final demise of the Low\n         Moor Iron Company.","Low Moor Iron Company Personnel:","Executive Staff: Managing Director, Colonel H. M.\n         Goodwin: ca. 1881. General Managers: H. G. Merry: ca.\n         1884-1902; E. C. Means: ca. 1905-1915; J. P. Guernsey: ca.\n         1915 (acting General Manager); F. U. Humbert: ca.\n         1916-1929. Assistant General Manager: E. B. Wilkinson: ca.\n         1909-1915. Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers: Edward Low:\n         ca. 1886-1898; Frank Lyman (in New York): ca. 1898-1919; S.\n         G. Cragill (Asst. Treasurer): ca. 1900-1915; H. A. Dalton:\n         ca. 1921-1929; John Lipscomb (Asst. Treasurer): ca.\n         1918-1928.","Factory and Mine Supervisors: Kay Moor Superintendents:\n         C. C. Cooke: ca. 1918; Ed. D. Wickes: ca. 1906; H. L.\n         Tansell: ca. 1903; A. H. Reed: ca. 1906. Kay Moor Managers:\n         J. W. Monteith: manager of mines. ca. 1918; promoted in\n         1925 to general superintendent in charge of mine plants,\n         coke ovens, shops, repairs, and construction; A. L.\n         Monteith: assistant superintendent of mines, ca. 1918;\n         George T. Wickes: manager of Covington mines, ca.\n         1906-1917; Ross Howell, ca. 1918. Stack Mines\n         Superintendents: J. H. Carpenter: ca. 1906; C. D.\n         Oberschain: ca. 1907; J. L. Harris: ca. 1903; John S. Ham:\n         ca. 1891-1901. Rich Patch Mines Superintendents: John R.\n         Thompson: foreman, ca. 1906. Low Moor assorted other\n         personnel: S. L. Tulley: trainmaster, ca. 1906; B. J.\n         Shenkley: foreman, Low Moor limestone quarries; L. Q. Wood:\n         assistant traffic manager, ca. 1919."],"scopecontent_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThis material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers.\u003c/p\u003e"],"scopecontent_heading_ssm":["Scope and Content Information"],"scopecontent_tesim":["The Low Moor Iron Company papers consist of\n         approximately 280 four-inch Hollinger archives boxes (ca.\n         95 linear feet) of records, ca. 1885-1927, and some 1200\n         bound volumes of the company's accounting records,\n         1873-1927, of this iron producing company located in Low\n         Moor (four miles southwest of Clifton Forge), Alleghany\n         County, Virginia.","This material consists of records typical of those\n         produced by a firm of this type in the period, but as the\n         company owned its own coal and iron mines and limestone\n         quarries, there is considerable information about the\n         production of these raw materials. Large numbers of the\n         records that deal with the company's employees have\n         survived: time books, payroll books, hands ledgers, and the\n         like. Because these books sometimes include information\n         about the employee's trade or job with the company, and as\n         race is indicated in some of the records, these books\n         should provide date for studies of the structure and upward\n         mobility within the labor force, patterns of\n         ethnic--possibly racial--occupational penetration and\n         mobility, material conditions of the workers, and so on.\n         The papers should permit a range of studies detailing the\n         pattern and evolution of industrial organization in the\n         iron industry, and the evolution of markets and marketing\n         structures for the entire period. Because the company was\n         dependent upon railroads to move its raw materials to the\n         furnaces, and for the marketing of its products, there is\n         considerable information about railroads and their\n         relationship to their customers."],"language_ssim":["English"],"total_component_count_is":1879,"online_item_count_is":0,"component_level_isim":[0],"sort_isi":0,"timestamp":"2026-05-01T02:17:12.165Z"}]}},"label":"Breadcrumbs"}}},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viu_viu00917_c01_c15_c02"}},{"id":"viw_repositories_2_resources_1026_c01_c02","type":"Subseries","attributes":{"title":"Books, Publications and Language","abstract_or_scope":{"id":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viw_repositories_2_resources_1026_c01_c02#abstract_or_scope","type":"document_value","attributes":{"value":"\u003cp\u003eThe Critical Review Title pages removed from books. On the 1797 title page, a handwritten note about the 1807 comet. 15 pages. 1792-1803. Gibbon's \"Rome\" Notes made on James Gibbon's \"Rome.\" 1806. Language – Word Definitions Scrap papers with words and their definitions. Undated, but possibly 1800's. Bookseller A twelve page advertising pamphlet, \"Proclamation by Charles I and James I of England Concerning the Colonies\" from Orion Booksellers, Ltd. London, England. Undated. Scuffling her Way Copy of Scuffling Her Way, by Sally Nelson Robbins, cut out of periodicals and pasted into a book. Presented by Mrs. William G. Stanard to the Woman's Club. Richmond, Virginia. March 1912. The Virginia Quarterly Typed article entitled, \"The Gentleman from Indiana\" by A.A. Roger. Undated.\u003c/p\u003e","label":"Abstract Or Scope"}},"breadcrumbs":{"id":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viw_repositories_2_resources_1026_c01_c02#breadcrumbs","type":"document_value","attributes":{"value":{"ref_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_1026_c01_c02","ref_ssm":["viw_repositories_2_resources_1026_c01_c02"],"id":"viw_repositories_2_resources_1026_c01_c02","ead_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_1026","_root_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_1026","_nest_parent_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_1026_c01","parent_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_1026_c01","parent_ssim":["viw_repositories_2_resources_1026","viw_repositories_2_resources_1026_c01"],"parent_ids_ssim":["viw_repositories_2_resources_1026","viw_repositories_2_resources_1026_c01"],"parent_unittitles_ssm":["Manuscripts - Geographic Names, Business Names and Subjects","Subjects (A-N)"],"parent_unittitles_tesim":["Manuscripts - Geographic Names, Business Names and Subjects","Subjects (A-N)"],"text":["Manuscripts - Geographic Names, Business Names and Subjects","Subjects (A-N)","Books, Publications and Language","Box 1","The Critical Review Title pages removed from books. On the 1797 title page, a handwritten note about the 1807 comet. 15 pages. 1792-1803. Gibbon's \"Rome\" Notes made on James Gibbon's \"Rome.\" 1806. Language – Word Definitions Scrap papers with words and their definitions. Undated, but possibly 1800's. Bookseller A twelve page advertising pamphlet, \"Proclamation by Charles I and James I of England Concerning the Colonies\"  from Orion Booksellers, Ltd. London, England. Undated. Scuffling her Way Copy of Scuffling Her Way, by Sally Nelson Robbins, cut out of periodicals and pasted into a book. Presented by Mrs. William G. Stanard to the Woman's Club. Richmond, Virginia. March 1912. The Virginia Quarterly Typed article entitled, \"The Gentleman from Indiana\" by A.A. Roger. Undated."],"title_filing_ssi":"Books, Publications and Language","title_ssm":["Books, Publications and Language"],"title_tesim":["Books, Publications and Language"],"unitdate_inclusive_ssm":["1806-1912 and undated"],"normalized_date_ssm":["1806/1912"],"normalized_title_ssm":["Books, Publications and Language"],"component_level_isim":[2],"repository_ssim":["College of William and Mary"],"collection_ssim":["Manuscripts - Geographic Names, Business Names and Subjects"],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"child_component_count_isi":0,"level_ssm":["Subseries"],"level_ssim":["Subseries"],"sort_isi":3,"parent_access_restrict_tesm":["Collection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility."],"parent_access_terms_tesm":["Before reproducing or quoting from any materials, in whole or in part, permission must be obtained from the Special Collections Research Center, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library."],"date_range_isim":[1806,1807,1808,1809,1810,1811,1812,1813,1814,1815,1816,1817,1818,1819,1820,1821,1822,1823,1824,1825,1826,1827,1828,1829,1830,1831,1832,1833,1834,1835,1836,1837,1838,1839,1840,1841,1842,1843,1844,1845,1846,1847,1848,1849,1850,1851,1852,1853,1854,1855,1856,1857,1858,1859,1860,1861,1862,1863,1864,1865,1866,1867,1868,1869,1870,1871,1872,1873,1874,1875,1876,1877,1878,1879,1880,1881,1882,1883,1884,1885,1886,1887,1888,1889,1890,1891,1892,1893,1894,1895,1896,1897,1898,1899,1900,1901,1902,1903,1904,1905,1906,1907,1908,1909,1910,1911,1912],"containers_ssim":["Box 1"],"scopecontent_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eThe Critical Review Title pages removed from books. On the 1797 title page, a handwritten note about the 1807 comet. 15 pages. 1792-1803. Gibbon's \"Rome\" Notes made on James Gibbon's \"Rome.\" 1806. Language – Word Definitions Scrap papers with words and their definitions. Undated, but possibly 1800's. Bookseller A twelve page advertising pamphlet, \"Proclamation by Charles I and James I of England Concerning the Colonies\"  from Orion Booksellers, Ltd. London, England. Undated. Scuffling her Way Copy of Scuffling Her Way, by Sally Nelson Robbins, cut out of periodicals and pasted into a book. Presented by Mrs. William G. Stanard to the Woman's Club. Richmond, Virginia. March 1912. The Virginia Quarterly Typed article entitled, \"The Gentleman from Indiana\" by A.A. Roger. Undated.\u003c/p\u003e"],"scopecontent_heading_ssm":["Scope and Contents"],"scopecontent_tesim":["The Critical Review Title pages removed from books. On the 1797 title page, a handwritten note about the 1807 comet. 15 pages. 1792-1803. Gibbon's \"Rome\" Notes made on James Gibbon's \"Rome.\" 1806. Language – Word Definitions Scrap papers with words and their definitions. Undated, but possibly 1800's. Bookseller A twelve page advertising pamphlet, \"Proclamation by Charles I and James I of England Concerning the Colonies\"  from Orion Booksellers, Ltd. London, England. Undated. Scuffling her Way Copy of Scuffling Her Way, by Sally Nelson Robbins, cut out of periodicals and pasted into a book. Presented by Mrs. William G. Stanard to the Woman's Club. Richmond, Virginia. March 1912. The Virginia Quarterly Typed article entitled, \"The Gentleman from Indiana\" by A.A. Roger. Undated."],"_nest_path_":"/components#0/components#1","timestamp":"2026-04-30T22:10:06.533Z","collection":{"numFound":1,"start":0,"numFoundExact":true,"docs":[{"id":"viw_repositories_2_resources_1026","ead_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_1026","_root_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_1026","_nest_parent_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_1026","ead_source_url_ssi":"data/oai/WM/repositories_2_resources_1026.xml","title_filing_ssi":"Manuscripts - Geographic Names, Business Names and","title_ssm":["Manuscripts - Geographic Names, Business Names and Subjects"],"title_tesim":["Manuscripts - Geographic Names, Business Names and Subjects"],"unitdate_ssm":["1725-1949"],"unitdate_inclusive_ssm":["1725-1949"],"level_ssm":["collection"],"level_ssim":["Collection"],"unitid_ssm":["Mss. 39.2 Man3b","/repositories/2/resources/1026"],"text":["Mss. 39.2 Man3b","/repositories/2/resources/1026","Manuscripts - Geographic Names, Business Names and Subjects","Shipping--History--18th century.","Slavery","Collection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility.","Alphabetical order by subject.","An artificial collection of papers created from material acquired during the 1930's and 1940's.","Before reproducing or quoting from any materials, in whole or in part, permission must be obtained from the Special Collections Research Center, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library.","Special Collections Research Center","English"],"unitid_tesim":["Mss. 39.2 Man3b","/repositories/2/resources/1026"],"normalized_title_ssm":["Manuscripts - Geographic Names, Business Names and Subjects"],"collection_title_tesim":["Manuscripts - Geographic Names, Business Names and Subjects"],"collection_ssim":["Manuscripts - Geographic Names, Business Names and Subjects"],"repository_ssm":["College of William and Mary"],"repository_ssim":["College of William and Mary"],"access_terms_ssm":["Before reproducing or quoting from any materials, in whole or in part, permission must be obtained from the Special Collections Research Center, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library."],"acqinfo_ssim":["This collection is an artificial grouping of material given to Special Collections or purchased by Special Collections during the 1930's and 1940's."],"access_subjects_ssim":["Shipping--History--18th century.","Slavery"],"access_subjects_ssm":["Shipping--History--18th century.","Slavery"],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"extent_ssm":["4.00 Linear Feet"],"extent_tesim":["4.00 Linear Feet"],"date_range_isim":[1725,1726,1727,1728,1729,1730,1731,1732,1733,1734,1735,1736,1737,1738,1739,1740,1741,1742,1743,1744,1745,1746,1747,1748,1749,1750,1751,1752,1753,1754,1755,1756,1757,1758,1759,1760,1761,1762,1763,1764,1765,1766,1767,1768,1769,1770,1771,1772,1773,1774,1775,1776,1777,1778,1779,1780,1781,1782,1783,1784,1785,1786,1787,1788,1789,1790,1791,1792,1793,1794,1795,1796,1797,1798,1799,1800,1801,1802,1803,1804,1805,1806,1807,1808,1809,1810,1811,1812,1813,1814,1815,1816,1817,1818,1819,1820,1821,1822,1823,1824,1825,1826,1827,1828,1829,1830,1831,1832,1833,1834,1835,1836,1837,1838,1839,1840,1841,1842,1843,1844,1845,1846,1847,1848,1849,1850,1851,1852,1853,1854,1855,1856,1857,1858,1859,1860,1861,1862,1863,1864,1865,1866,1867,1868,1869,1870,1871,1872,1873,1874,1875,1876,1877,1878,1879,1880,1881,1882,1883,1884,1885,1886,1887,1888,1889,1890,1891,1892,1893,1894,1895,1896,1897,1898,1899,1900,1901,1902,1903,1904,1905,1906,1907,1908,1909,1910,1911,1912,1913,1914,1915,1916,1917,1918,1919,1920,1921,1922,1923,1924,1925,1926,1927,1928,1929,1930,1931,1932,1933,1934,1935,1936,1937,1938,1939,1940,1941,1942,1943,1944,1945,1946,1947,1948,1949],"accessrestrict_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eCollection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility.\u003c/p\u003e"],"accessrestrict_heading_ssm":["Conditions Governing Access"],"accessrestrict_tesim":["Collection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility."],"arrangement_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eAlphabetical order by subject.\u003c/p\u003e"],"arrangement_heading_ssm":["Arrangement"],"arrangement_tesim":["Alphabetical order by subject."],"prefercite_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eManuscripts - Group 3 - Subject, Special Collections Research Center, Swem Library, College of William and Mary\u003c/p\u003e"],"prefercite_tesim":["Manuscripts - Group 3 - Subject, Special Collections Research Center, Swem Library, College of William and Mary"],"scopecontent_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eAn artificial collection of papers created from material acquired during the 1930's and 1940's.\u003c/p\u003e"],"scopecontent_heading_ssm":["Scope and Contents"],"scopecontent_tesim":["An artificial collection of papers created from material acquired during the 1930's and 1940's."],"userestrict_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eBefore reproducing or quoting from any materials, in whole or in part, permission must be obtained from the Special Collections Research Center, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library.\u003c/p\u003e"],"userestrict_heading_ssm":["Conditions Governing Use"],"userestrict_tesim":["Before reproducing or quoting from any materials, in whole or in part, permission must be obtained from the Special Collections Research Center, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library."],"names_ssim":["Special Collections Research Center"],"corpname_ssim":["Special Collections Research Center"],"language_ssim":["English"],"total_component_count_is":53,"online_item_count_is":0,"component_level_isim":[0],"sort_isi":0,"timestamp":"2026-04-30T22:10:06.533Z"}]}},"label":"Breadcrumbs"}}},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viw_repositories_2_resources_1026_c01_c02"}},{"id":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9963_c01_c03","type":"Subseries","attributes":{"title":"Box 1","breadcrumbs":{"id":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viw_repositories_2_resources_9963_c01_c03#breadcrumbs","type":"document_value","attributes":{"value":{"ref_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9963_c01_c03","ref_ssm":["viw_repositories_2_resources_9963_c01_c03"],"id":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9963_c01_c03","ead_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9963","_root_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9963","_nest_parent_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9963_c01","parent_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9963_c01","parent_ssim":["viw_repositories_2_resources_9963","viw_repositories_2_resources_9963_c01"],"parent_ids_ssim":["viw_repositories_2_resources_9963","viw_repositories_2_resources_9963_c01"],"parent_unittitles_ssm":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers","Series 4: Mary Haldane Begg Coleman"],"parent_unittitles_tesim":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers","Series 4: Mary Haldane Begg Coleman"],"text":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers","Series 4: Mary Haldane Begg Coleman","Box 1","Box 1"],"title_filing_ssi":"Box 1","title_ssm":["Box 1"],"title_tesim":["Box 1"],"unitdate_inclusive_ssm":["1867-1993"],"normalized_date_ssm":["1867/1993"],"normalized_title_ssm":["Box 1"],"component_level_isim":[2],"repository_ssim":["College of William and Mary"],"collection_ssim":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers"],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"child_component_count_isi":0,"level_ssm":["Subseries"],"level_ssim":["Subseries"],"sort_isi":15,"parent_access_restrict_tesm":["Collection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility."],"parent_access_terms_tesm":["Before publishing quotations or excerpts from any materials, permission must be obtained from the Curator of Manuscripts and Rare Books, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library."],"date_range_isim":[1867,1868,1869,1870,1871,1872,1873,1874,1875,1876,1877,1878,1879,1880,1881,1882,1883,1884,1885,1886,1887,1888,1889,1890,1891,1892,1893,1894,1895,1896,1897,1898,1899,1900,1901,1902,1903,1904,1905,1906,1907,1908,1909,1910,1911,1912,1913,1914,1915,1916,1917,1918,1919,1920,1921,1922,1923,1924,1925,1926,1927,1928,1929,1930,1931,1932,1933,1934,1935,1936,1937,1938,1939,1940,1941,1942,1943,1944,1945,1946,1947,1948,1949,1950,1951,1952,1953,1954,1955,1956,1957,1958,1959,1960,1961,1962,1963,1964,1965,1966,1967,1968,1969,1970,1971,1972,1973,1974,1975,1976,1977,1978,1979,1980,1981,1982,1983,1984,1985,1986,1987,1988,1989,1990,1991,1992,1993],"containers_ssim":["Box 1"],"_nest_path_":"/components#0/components#2","timestamp":"2026-04-30T22:04:43.165Z","collection":{"numFound":1,"start":0,"numFoundExact":true,"docs":[{"id":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9963","ead_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9963","_root_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9963","_nest_parent_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9963","ead_source_url_ssi":"data/oai/WM/repositories_2_resources_9963.xml","title_filing_ssi":"Coleman-Kimbrough papers","title_ssm":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers"],"title_tesim":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers"],"unitdate_ssm":["1870-1992"],"unitdate_inclusive_ssm":["1870-1992"],"level_ssm":["collection"],"level_ssim":["Collection"],"unitid_ssm":["Mss. Acc. 1993.39","/repositories/2/resources/9963"],"text":["Mss. Acc. 1993.39","/repositories/2/resources/9963","Coleman-Kimbrough papers","Collection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility.","Before publishing quotations or excerpts from any materials, permission must be obtained from the Curator of Manuscripts and Rare Books, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library.","Special Collections Research Center","Coleman family","Kimbrough, Janet C","Coleman, Charles Washington, 1826-1894","Coleman, Mary Haldane Begg, 1875-1967","English"],"unitid_tesim":["Mss. Acc. 1993.39","/repositories/2/resources/9963"],"normalized_title_ssm":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers"],"collection_title_tesim":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers"],"collection_ssim":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers"],"repository_ssm":["College of William and Mary"],"repository_ssim":["College of William and Mary"],"creator_ssm":["Kimbrough, Janet C","Coleman, Charles Washington, 1826-1894","Coleman family","Coleman, Mary Haldane Begg, 1875-1967"],"creator_ssim":["Kimbrough, Janet C","Coleman, Charles Washington, 1826-1894","Coleman family","Coleman, Mary Haldane Begg, 1875-1967"],"creator_persname_ssim":["Kimbrough, Janet C","Coleman, Charles Washington, 1826-1894","Coleman, Mary Haldane Begg, 1875-1967"],"creator_famname_ssim":["Coleman family"],"creators_ssim":["Kimbrough, Janet C","Coleman, Charles Washington, 1826-1894","Coleman, Mary Haldane Begg, 1875-1967","Coleman family"],"access_terms_ssm":["Before publishing quotations or excerpts from any materials, permission must be obtained from the Curator of Manuscripts and Rare Books, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library."],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"extent_ssm":["80 Linear Feet"],"extent_tesim":["80 Linear Feet"],"date_range_isim":[1870,1871,1872,1873,1874,1875,1876,1877,1878,1879,1880,1881,1882,1883,1884,1885,1886,1887,1888,1889,1890,1891,1892,1893,1894,1895,1896,1897,1898,1899,1900,1901,1902,1903,1904,1905,1906,1907,1908,1909,1910,1911,1912,1913,1914,1915,1916,1917,1918,1919,1920,1921,1922,1923,1924,1925,1926,1927,1928,1929,1930,1931,1932,1933,1934,1935,1936,1937,1938,1939,1940,1941,1942,1943,1944,1945,1946,1947,1948,1949,1950,1951,1952,1953,1954,1955,1956,1957,1958,1959,1960,1961,1962,1963,1964,1965,1966,1967,1968,1969,1970,1971,1972,1973,1974,1975,1976,1977,1978,1979,1980,1981,1982,1983,1984,1985,1986,1987,1988,1989,1990,1991,1992],"accessrestrict_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eCollection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility.\u003c/p\u003e"],"accessrestrict_heading_ssm":["Conditions Governing Access"],"accessrestrict_tesim":["Collection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility."],"userestrict_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eBefore publishing quotations or excerpts from any materials, permission must be obtained from the Curator of Manuscripts and Rare Books, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library.\u003c/p\u003e"],"userestrict_heading_ssm":["Conditions Governing Use"],"userestrict_tesim":["Before publishing quotations or excerpts from any materials, permission must be obtained from the Curator of Manuscripts and Rare Books, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library."],"names_ssim":["Special Collections Research Center","Coleman family","Kimbrough, Janet C","Coleman, Charles Washington, 1826-1894","Coleman, Mary Haldane Begg, 1875-1967"],"corpname_ssim":["Special Collections Research Center"],"famname_ssim":["Coleman family"],"persname_ssim":["Kimbrough, Janet C","Coleman, Charles Washington, 1826-1894","Coleman, Mary Haldane Begg, 1875-1967"],"language_ssim":["English"],"descrules_ssm":["Describing Archives: A Content Standard"],"total_component_count_is":15,"online_item_count_is":0,"component_level_isim":[0],"sort_isi":0,"timestamp":"2026-04-30T22:04:43.165Z"}]}},"label":"Breadcrumbs"}}},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viw_repositories_2_resources_9963_c01_c03"}},{"id":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9564_c01_c03","type":"Subseries","attributes":{"title":"Box 1","breadcrumbs":{"id":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viw_repositories_2_resources_9564_c01_c03#breadcrumbs","type":"document_value","attributes":{"value":{"ref_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9564_c01_c03","ref_ssm":["viw_repositories_2_resources_9564_c01_c03"],"id":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9564_c01_c03","ead_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9564","_root_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9564","_nest_parent_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9564_c01","parent_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9564_c01","parent_ssim":["viw_repositories_2_resources_9564","viw_repositories_2_resources_9564_c01"],"parent_ids_ssim":["viw_repositories_2_resources_9564","viw_repositories_2_resources_9564_c01"],"parent_unittitles_ssm":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers","Series 4: Mary Haldane Begg Coleman"],"parent_unittitles_tesim":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers","Series 4: Mary Haldane Begg Coleman"],"text":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers","Series 4: Mary Haldane Begg Coleman","Box 1","Box 1"],"title_filing_ssi":"Box 1","title_ssm":["Box 1"],"title_tesim":["Box 1"],"unitdate_inclusive_ssm":["1867-1993"],"normalized_date_ssm":["1867/1993"],"normalized_title_ssm":["Box 1"],"component_level_isim":[2],"repository_ssim":["College of William and Mary"],"collection_ssim":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers"],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"child_component_count_isi":0,"level_ssm":["Subseries"],"level_ssim":["Subseries"],"sort_isi":15,"parent_access_restrict_tesm":["Collection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility."],"parent_access_terms_tesm":["Before publishing quotations or excerpts from any materials, permission must be obtained from the Curator of Manuscripts and Rare Books, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library."],"date_range_isim":[1867,1868,1869,1870,1871,1872,1873,1874,1875,1876,1877,1878,1879,1880,1881,1882,1883,1884,1885,1886,1887,1888,1889,1890,1891,1892,1893,1894,1895,1896,1897,1898,1899,1900,1901,1902,1903,1904,1905,1906,1907,1908,1909,1910,1911,1912,1913,1914,1915,1916,1917,1918,1919,1920,1921,1922,1923,1924,1925,1926,1927,1928,1929,1930,1931,1932,1933,1934,1935,1936,1937,1938,1939,1940,1941,1942,1943,1944,1945,1946,1947,1948,1949,1950,1951,1952,1953,1954,1955,1956,1957,1958,1959,1960,1961,1962,1963,1964,1965,1966,1967,1968,1969,1970,1971,1972,1973,1974,1975,1976,1977,1978,1979,1980,1981,1982,1983,1984,1985,1986,1987,1988,1989,1990,1991,1992,1993],"containers_ssim":["Box 1"],"_nest_path_":"/components#0/components#2","timestamp":"2026-04-30T22:20:35.936Z","collection":{"numFound":1,"start":0,"numFoundExact":true,"docs":[{"id":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9564","ead_ssi":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9564","_root_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9564","_nest_parent_":"viw_repositories_2_resources_9564","ead_source_url_ssi":"data/oai/WM/repositories_2_resources_9564.xml","title_filing_ssi":"Coleman-Kimbrough Papers","title_ssm":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers"],"title_tesim":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers"],"unitdate_ssm":["1870-1992"],"unitdate_inclusive_ssm":["1870-1992"],"level_ssm":["collection"],"level_ssim":["Collection"],"unitid_ssm":["Mss. Acc. 1993.39","/repositories/2/resources/9564"],"text":["Mss. Acc. 1993.39","/repositories/2/resources/9564","Coleman-Kimbrough papers","Collection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility.","George Preston Coleman was born May 4, 1870 to Cynthia Beverley Tucker Washington Coleman and Charles Washington Coleman. He was a civil engineer who served as city engineer of Winona, Minnesota. He married Mary Haldane Begg (1875-1967) in 1900 and moved back to Williamsburg, Va. in    . He served on the Virginia Highway Commission and as Virginia Superintendent of Highways. Coleman served on the Board of Visitors of the College of William and Mary, as mayor of Williamsburg, Va. and as president of the Peninsula Bank. He died June 16, 1948. \nHe and Mary Haldane Coleman were the parents of two children: Janet Haldane Coleman who married and divorced Raymond DeVan Kimbrough, Sr. and Cynthia Beverley Coleman Moorehead who married Singleton Moorehead.Cynthia Moorehead lived in Williamsburg but suffered ill health (lupus) much of her life. Singleton Moorehead was an architect for Colonial Williamsburg. \nJanet Haldane Coleman Kimbrough was in the first coed class at William and Mary and received a medical degree from the University of Virginia.","Before publishing quotations or excerpts from any materials, permission must be obtained from the Curator of Manuscripts and Rare Books, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library.","Special Collections Research Center","Kimbrough, Janet C. (Janet Coleman)","Coleman, Charles Washington, 1862-1932","Coleman, Mary Haldane Begg, 1875-1967","English German"],"unitid_tesim":["Mss. Acc. 1993.39","/repositories/2/resources/9564"],"normalized_title_ssm":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers"],"collection_title_tesim":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers"],"collection_ssim":["Coleman-Kimbrough papers"],"repository_ssm":["College of William and Mary"],"repository_ssim":["College of William and Mary"],"creator_ssm":["Kimbrough, Janet C. (Janet Coleman)","Coleman, Charles Washington, 1862-1932","Coleman, Mary Haldane Begg, 1875-1967"],"creator_ssim":["Kimbrough, Janet C. (Janet Coleman)","Coleman, Charles Washington, 1862-1932","Coleman, Mary Haldane Begg, 1875-1967"],"creator_persname_ssim":["Kimbrough, Janet C. (Janet Coleman)","Coleman, Charles Washington, 1862-1932","Coleman, Mary Haldane Begg, 1875-1967"],"creators_ssim":["Kimbrough, Janet C. (Janet Coleman)","Coleman, Charles Washington, 1862-1932","Coleman, Mary Haldane Begg, 1875-1967"],"access_terms_ssm":["Before publishing quotations or excerpts from any materials, permission must be obtained from the Curator of Manuscripts and Rare Books, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library."],"has_online_content_ssim":["false"],"extent_ssm":["80 Linear Feet"],"extent_tesim":["80 Linear Feet"],"date_range_isim":[1870,1871,1872,1873,1874,1875,1876,1877,1878,1879,1880,1881,1882,1883,1884,1885,1886,1887,1888,1889,1890,1891,1892,1893,1894,1895,1896,1897,1898,1899,1900,1901,1902,1903,1904,1905,1906,1907,1908,1909,1910,1911,1912,1913,1914,1915,1916,1917,1918,1919,1920,1921,1922,1923,1924,1925,1926,1927,1928,1929,1930,1931,1932,1933,1934,1935,1936,1937,1938,1939,1940,1941,1942,1943,1944,1945,1946,1947,1948,1949,1950,1951,1952,1953,1954,1955,1956,1957,1958,1959,1960,1961,1962,1963,1964,1965,1966,1967,1968,1969,1970,1971,1972,1973,1974,1975,1976,1977,1978,1979,1980,1981,1982,1983,1984,1985,1986,1987,1988,1989,1990,1991,1992],"accessrestrict_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eCollection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility.\u003c/p\u003e"],"accessrestrict_heading_ssm":["Conditions Governing Access"],"accessrestrict_tesim":["Collection is open to all researchers. Manuscript collections and archival records may contain materials with sensitive or confidential information that is protected under federal or state right to privacy laws and regulations, such as the Virginia Public Records Act (Code of Virginia. § 42.1-76-91); and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3705.5). Confidential material may include, but is not limited to, educational, medical, and personnel records. If sensitive material is found in this collection, please contact a staff member immediately. The disclosure of personally identifiable information pertaining to a living individual may have legal consequences for which the College of William and Mary assumes no responsibility."],"bioghist_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eGeorge Preston Coleman was born May 4, 1870 to Cynthia Beverley Tucker Washington Coleman and Charles Washington Coleman. He was a civil engineer who served as city engineer of Winona, Minnesota. He married Mary Haldane Begg (1875-1967) in 1900 and moved back to Williamsburg, Va. in    . He served on the Virginia Highway Commission and as Virginia Superintendent of Highways. Coleman served on the Board of Visitors of the College of William and Mary, as mayor of Williamsburg, Va. and as president of the Peninsula Bank. He died June 16, 1948. \nHe and Mary Haldane Coleman were the parents of two children: Janet Haldane Coleman who married and divorced Raymond DeVan Kimbrough, Sr. and Cynthia Beverley Coleman Moorehead who married Singleton Moorehead.Cynthia Moorehead lived in Williamsburg but suffered ill health (lupus) much of her life. Singleton Moorehead was an architect for Colonial Williamsburg. \nJanet Haldane Coleman Kimbrough was in the first coed class at William and Mary and received a medical degree from the University of Virginia.\u003c/p\u003e"],"bioghist_heading_ssm":["Biographical / Historical"],"bioghist_tesim":["George Preston Coleman was born May 4, 1870 to Cynthia Beverley Tucker Washington Coleman and Charles Washington Coleman. He was a civil engineer who served as city engineer of Winona, Minnesota. He married Mary Haldane Begg (1875-1967) in 1900 and moved back to Williamsburg, Va. in    . He served on the Virginia Highway Commission and as Virginia Superintendent of Highways. Coleman served on the Board of Visitors of the College of William and Mary, as mayor of Williamsburg, Va. and as president of the Peninsula Bank. He died June 16, 1948. \nHe and Mary Haldane Coleman were the parents of two children: Janet Haldane Coleman who married and divorced Raymond DeVan Kimbrough, Sr. and Cynthia Beverley Coleman Moorehead who married Singleton Moorehead.Cynthia Moorehead lived in Williamsburg but suffered ill health (lupus) much of her life. Singleton Moorehead was an architect for Colonial Williamsburg. \nJanet Haldane Coleman Kimbrough was in the first coed class at William and Mary and received a medical degree from the University of Virginia."],"userestrict_html_tesm":["\u003cp\u003eBefore publishing quotations or excerpts from any materials, permission must be obtained from the Curator of Manuscripts and Rare Books, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library.\u003c/p\u003e"],"userestrict_heading_ssm":["Conditions Governing Use"],"userestrict_tesim":["Before publishing quotations or excerpts from any materials, permission must be obtained from the Curator of Manuscripts and Rare Books, and the holder of the copyright, if not Swem Library."],"names_ssim":["Special Collections Research Center","Kimbrough, Janet C. (Janet Coleman)","Coleman, Charles Washington, 1862-1932","Coleman, Mary Haldane Begg, 1875-1967"],"corpname_ssim":["Special Collections Research Center"],"persname_ssim":["Kimbrough, Janet C. (Janet Coleman)","Coleman, Charles Washington, 1862-1932","Coleman, Mary Haldane Begg, 1875-1967"],"language_ssim":["English German"],"descrules_ssm":["Describing Archives: A Content Standard"],"total_component_count_is":15,"online_item_count_is":0,"component_level_isim":[0],"sort_isi":0,"timestamp":"2026-04-30T22:20:35.936Z"}]}},"label":"Breadcrumbs"}}},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/viw_repositories_2_resources_9564_c01_c03"}}],"included":[{"type":"facet","id":"repository_ssim","attributes":{"label":"Repository","items":[{"attributes":{"label":"Alexandria Library","value":"Alexandria Library","hits":9},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Brepository%5D%5B%5D=Alexandria+Library"}},{"attributes":{"label":"College of William and Mary","value":"College of William and Mary","hits":104},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Brepository%5D%5B%5D=College+of+William+and+Mary"}},{"attributes":{"label":"George Mason University","value":"George Mason University","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Brepository%5D%5B%5D=George+Mason+University"}},{"attributes":{"label":"James Madison University","value":"James Madison University","hits":6},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Brepository%5D%5B%5D=James+Madison+University"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Longwood University","value":"Longwood University","hits":4},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Brepository%5D%5B%5D=Longwood+University"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Old Dominion University","value":"Old Dominion University","hits":45},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Brepository%5D%5B%5D=Old+Dominion+University"}},{"attributes":{"label":"The George Washington Presidential Library at Mount Vernon","value":"The George Washington Presidential Library at Mount Vernon","hits":22},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Brepository%5D%5B%5D=The+George+Washington+Presidential+Library+at+Mount+Vernon"}},{"attributes":{"label":"University of Richmond","value":"University of Richmond","hits":4},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Brepository%5D%5B%5D=University+of+Richmond"}},{"attributes":{"label":"University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept.","value":"University of Virginia, Special Collections Dept.","hits":78},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Brepository%5D%5B%5D=University+of+Virginia%2C+Special+Collections+Dept."}},{"attributes":{"label":"Virginia Commonwealth University, Cabell Library","value":"Virginia Commonwealth University, Cabell Library","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Brepository%5D%5B%5D=Virginia+Commonwealth+University%2C+Cabell+Library"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Virginia Museum of Fine Arts","value":"Virginia Museum of Fine Arts","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Brepository%5D%5B%5D=Virginia+Museum+of+Fine+Arts"}}]},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/facet/repository_ssim.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"type":"facet","id":"collection_ssim","attributes":{"label":"Collection","items":[{"attributes":{"label":"Adele Goodman Clark papers","value":"Adele Goodman Clark papers","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=Adele+Goodman+Clark+papers\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Admiral John Randolph Tucker Papers","value":"Admiral John Randolph Tucker Papers","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=Admiral+John+Randolph+Tucker+Papers\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Alexander Farish Robertson Papers","value":"Alexander Farish Robertson Papers","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=Alexander+Farish+Robertson+Papers\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Alexander Haight family collection","value":"Alexander Haight family collection","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=Alexander+Haight+family+collection\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Alumni Association Records","value":"Alumni Association Records","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=Alumni+Association+Records\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Ancella Bickley, Historian, Research Papers regarding African-Americans","value":"Ancella Bickley, Historian, Research Papers regarding African-Americans","hits":9},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=Ancella+Bickley%2C+Historian%2C+Research+Papers+regarding+African-Americans\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Armistead Boothe Papers (MS164)","value":"Armistead Boothe Papers (MS164)","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=Armistead+Boothe+Papers+%28MS164%29\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Atkeson-Morgan Family Papers","value":"Atkeson-Morgan Family Papers","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=Atkeson-Morgan+Family+Papers\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Austin-Twyman Papers","value":"Austin-Twyman Papers","hits":27},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=Austin-Twyman+Papers\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Bailey-Law Collection","value":"Bailey-Law Collection","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=Bailey-Law+Collection\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Bell, Kent, Cloyd, Withrow Family Collection","value":"Bell, Kent, Cloyd, Withrow Family Collection","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=Bell%2C+Kent%2C+Cloyd%2C+Withrow+Family+Collection\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}}]},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/facet/collection_ssim.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"type":"facet","id":"date_range_isim","attributes":{"label":"Date range","items":[{"attributes":{"label":"994","value":"994","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=994\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"995","value":"995","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=995\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"996","value":"996","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=996\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"997","value":"997","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=997\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"998","value":"998","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=998\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"999","value":"999","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=999\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"1000","value":"1000","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1000\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"1001","value":"1001","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1001\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"1002","value":"1002","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1002\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"1003","value":"1003","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1003\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"1004","value":"1004","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1004\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}}]},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/facet/date_range_isim.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"type":"facet","id":"creator_ssim","attributes":{"label":"Creator","items":[{"attributes":{"label":"Laughton, Lily Macalester Berghmans, 1832-1891","value":"Laughton, Lily Macalester Berghmans, 1832-1891","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bcreators%5D%5B%5D=Laughton%2C+Lily+Macalester+Berghmans%2C+1832-1891\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}}]},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/facet/creator_ssim.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"type":"facet","id":"names_ssim","attributes":{"label":"Names","items":[{"attributes":{"label":"Abrahams, Meliora Hambleton","value":"Abrahams, Meliora Hambleton","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Bnames%5D%5B%5D=Abrahams%2C+Meliora+Hambleton"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Alexander, Anna Maria Washington, 1817-1850","value":"Alexander, Anna Maria Washington, 1817-1850","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Bnames%5D%5B%5D=Alexander%2C+Anna+Maria+Washington%2C+1817-1850"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Alexander, Hannah Lee Washington, 1811-1881","value":"Alexander, Hannah Lee Washington, 1811-1881","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Bnames%5D%5B%5D=Alexander%2C+Hannah+Lee+Washington%2C+1811-1881"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Alexander, Hope Powel, 1925-2019","value":"Alexander, Hope Powel, 1925-2019","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Bnames%5D%5B%5D=Alexander%2C+Hope+Powel%2C+1925-2019"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Alexander, Judith Ball Blackburn, 1796-1866","value":"Alexander, Judith Ball Blackburn, 1796-1866","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Bnames%5D%5B%5D=Alexander%2C+Judith+Ball+Blackburn%2C+1796-1866"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Alexander, William Fontaine, 1811-1862","value":"Alexander, William Fontaine, 1811-1862","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Bnames%5D%5B%5D=Alexander%2C+William+Fontaine%2C+1811-1862"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Alfred I. Du Pont School District","value":"Alfred I. Du Pont School District","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Bnames%5D%5B%5D=Alfred+I.+Du+Pont+School+District"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Ames, Anne Carrington Dwight, 1849-1904","value":"Ames, Anne Carrington Dwight, 1849-1904","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Bnames%5D%5B%5D=Ames%2C+Anne+Carrington+Dwight%2C+1849-1904"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Anderson, Anne Page Wilder, 1873-1956","value":"Anderson, Anne Page Wilder, 1873-1956","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Bnames%5D%5B%5D=Anderson%2C+Anne+Page+Wilder%2C+1873-1956"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Anderson, Helen Sharp, 1916-2013","value":"Anderson, Helen Sharp, 1916-2013","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Bnames%5D%5B%5D=Anderson%2C+Helen+Sharp%2C+1916-2013"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Anderson, Isabel Scott, 1899-1994","value":"Anderson, Isabel Scott, 1899-1994","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Bnames%5D%5B%5D=Anderson%2C+Isabel+Scott%2C+1899-1994"}}]},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/facet/names_ssim.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"type":"facet","id":"geogname_ssim","attributes":{"label":"Places","items":[{"attributes":{"label":"Yorktown (Va.)","value":"Yorktown (Va.)","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Bplaces%5D%5B%5D=Yorktown+%28Va.%29"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Yorktown (Va.)--History--19th century","value":"Yorktown (Va.)--History--19th century","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Bplaces%5D%5B%5D=Yorktown+%28Va.%29--History--19th+century"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Yorktown (Va.)--History--20th century","value":"Yorktown (Va.)--History--20th century","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Bplaces%5D%5B%5D=Yorktown+%28Va.%29--History--20th+century"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Yorktown (Va.)--History--Siege, 1781--Centennial celebrations, etc","value":"Yorktown (Va.)--History--Siege, 1781--Centennial celebrations, etc","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026f%5Bplaces%5D%5B%5D=Yorktown+%28Va.%29--History--Siege%2C+1781--Centennial+celebrations%2C+etc"}}]},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/facet/geogname_ssim.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"type":"facet","id":"access_subjects_ssim","attributes":{"label":"Subjects","items":[{"attributes":{"label":"Engravings (Prints)","value":"Engravings (Prints)","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Baccess_subjects%5D%5B%5D=Engravings+%28Prints%29\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Fliers (printed matter)","value":"Fliers (printed matter)","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Baccess_subjects%5D%5B%5D=Fliers+%28printed+matter%29\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Pamphlets","value":"Pamphlets","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Baccess_subjects%5D%5B%5D=Pamphlets\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"Photographs","value":"Photographs","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Baccess_subjects%5D%5B%5D=Photographs\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"United States--History--Revolution, 1775-1783","value":"United States--History--Revolution, 1775-1783","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Baccess_subjects%5D%5B%5D=United+States--History--Revolution%2C+1775-1783\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"attributes":{"label":"United States. Navy","value":"United States. Navy","hits":1},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Baccess_subjects%5D%5B%5D=United+States.+Navy\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}}]},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/facet/access_subjects_ssim.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"type":"facet","id":"level_ssim","attributes":{"label":"Level","items":[{"attributes":{"label":"Subseries","value":"Subseries","hits":393},"links":{"remove":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}}]},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/facet/level_ssim.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"type":"facet","id":"access","attributes":{"label":"Access","items":[{"attributes":{"label":"Online access","value":"online","hits":2},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Baccess%5D%5B%5D=online\u0026f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}}]},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog/facet/access.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries"}},{"type":"search_field","id":"all_fields","attributes":{"label":"All Fields"},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5\u0026search_field=all_fields"}},{"type":"search_field","id":"keyword","attributes":{"label":"Keyword"},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5\u0026search_field=keyword"}},{"type":"search_field","id":"name","attributes":{"label":"Name"},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5\u0026search_field=name"}},{"type":"search_field","id":"place","attributes":{"label":"Place"},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5\u0026search_field=place"}},{"type":"search_field","id":"subject","attributes":{"label":"Subject"},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5\u0026search_field=subject"}},{"type":"search_field","id":"title","attributes":{"label":"Title"},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5\u0026search_field=title"}},{"type":"search_field","id":"container","attributes":{"label":"Container"},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5\u0026search_field=container"}},{"type":"search_field","id":"identifier","attributes":{"label":"Identifier"},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5\u0026search_field=identifier"}},{"type":"sort","id":"score desc, title_sort asc","attributes":{"label":"relevance"},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5\u0026sort=score+desc%2C+title_sort+asc"}},{"type":"sort","id":"date_sort asc","attributes":{"label":"date (ascending)"},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5\u0026sort=date_sort+asc"}},{"type":"sort","id":"date_sort desc","attributes":{"label":"date (descending)"},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5\u0026sort=date_sort+desc"}},{"type":"sort","id":"creator_sort asc","attributes":{"label":"creator (A-Z)"},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5\u0026sort=creator_sort+asc"}},{"type":"sort","id":"creator_sort desc","attributes":{"label":"creator (Z-A)"},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5\u0026sort=creator_sort+desc"}},{"type":"sort","id":"title_sort asc","attributes":{"label":"title (A-Z)"},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5\u0026sort=title_sort+asc"}},{"type":"sort","id":"title_sort desc","attributes":{"label":"title (Z-A)"},"links":{"self":"https://search.arvasarchive.org/catalog.json?f%5Bdate_range%5D%5B%5D=1882\u0026f%5Blevel%5D%5B%5D=Subseries\u0026page=5\u0026sort=title_sort+desc"}}]}