No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Political Uses of Food Protests: Analyzing the 1910 Meat Boycott
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 October 2022
Abstract
In 1910, a meat boycott spread through the United States. Tens of thousands of people pledged not to eat meat for thirty days to demand lower prices and protest the practices of the Meat Trust. The movement, though its outcomes were limited, was supported by consumer organizations, labor unions, lawmakers, suffragists, and women's clubs. It thus intersected with struggles that were at the heart of the Progressive Era's reform movements. This article will explore how various organizations (labor unions, the Socialist Party, suffragists, the National Consumers League) used, or did not use, this event to further their own goals. It will argue that food protests constitute a site from which to analyze particular transformations of the protest landscape of the time, such as the rise of consumer politics; it will also show that as transversal spaces of mobilization, food protests should be studied through the significance of their object. Food, as a meeting point between the individual body and society, can epitomize the blurring of the lines between private and public that characterized Progressive reform movements.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Journal of American Studies , Volume 57 , Special Issue 2: Food, Health and Welfare in the Long Twentieth Century , May 2023 , pp. 178 - 196
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press in association with the British Association for American Studies
References
1 On the evolution of prices and the cost of living in the Progressive Era see Rauchway, Eric, “The High Cost of Living in the Progressives’ Economy,” Journal of American History, 88, 3 (Dec. 2001), 898–924, 900CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Veit, Helen Zoe, Modern Food, Moral Food: Self-Control, Science, and the Rise of Modern American Eating in the Early Twentieth Century (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2015), 16Google Scholar. For studies of food movements in the early twentieth century see Hyman, Paula E., “Immigrant Women and Consumer Protest: The New York City Kosher Meat Boycott of 1902,” American Jewish History, 70, 1 (Sept. 1980), 91–105Google Scholar; Frank, Dana, “Housewives, Socialists, and the Politics of Food: The 1917 New York Cost-of-Living Protests,” Feminist Studies, 11, 2 (Summer 1985) 255–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kimberly Nusco, “The South Providence Kosher Meat Boycott of 1910: A Study of Jewish Women's Consumer Activism,” Open Access Master's Theses, Paper 1771, at https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/theses/1771; and Nusco, “The South Providence Kosher Meat Boycott of 1910,” Notes: Rhodes Island Jewish Historical Association, 13, 1 (Nov. 2003), 97–126.
2 Rodgers, Daniel T., “In Search of Progressivism,” Reviews in American History, 10, 4 (Dec. 1982), 113–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 114. On the diversity of progressive causes and coalitions see also Flanagan, Maureen A., America Reformed: Progressives and Progressivisms, 1890s–1920s (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006)Google Scholar.
3 Hyman.
4 DeSimone, Russell J., “Providence's ‘Macaroni Riots’ of 1914,” Italian Americana, 12, 2 (Summer 2014), 133–45Google Scholar.
5 Twarog, Emily E., Politics of the Pantry: Housewives, Food and Consumer Protest in Twentieth-Century America (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), 4CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
6 Haydu, Jeffrey, “Frame Brokerage in the Pure Food Movement, 1879–1906,” Social Movement Studies, 1, 11 (2012), 97–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
7 On the issue of consumer politics see in particular Glickman, Lawrence B., A Living Wage: American Workers and the Making of Consumer Society (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Glickman, Buying Power: A History of Consumer Activism in America (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2009); Jacobs, Meg, “‘How about Some Meat?’ The Office of Price Administration, Consumption Politics, and State Building from the Bottom Up, 1941–1946,” Journal of American History, 84, 3 (Dec. 1997), 910–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jacobs, , Pocketbook Politics: Economic Citizenship in Twentieth-Century America (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
8 “A Big War On Meat,” Washington Post, 22 Jan. 1910, 1. The account given in this paper of the boycott, its scope, and its different stages relies mainly on press articles: 78 articles from the New York Times, 42 from the San Francisco Chronicle, and 25 from the. Kimberly Nusco has also retraced the boycott's unfolding in “The South Providence Kosher Meat Boycott of 1910.”
9 “The Soaring Cost of Living,” New York Times 2 Jan. 1910.
10 “Meat Prices Soar,” New York Times, 8 Jan. 1910; “Asks Beef Trust Inquiry,” New York Times, 18 Jan. 1910; Meat-Packer Legislation, “Hearings before the Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives, Sixty-Sixth Congress, Second Session, on Meat-packer Legislation” (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1920), 1880.
11 Macleod, David I., “Food Prices, Politics, and Policy in the Progressive Era,” Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era, 8, 3 (July 2009), 365–406, 368CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
12 Both the New York Times and the Washington Post mention 125,000 boycotters in Cleveland on January 24. New York Times, “Little Meat For Cleveland: Supply Has Become So Small That Prices Are Kept High”; Washington Post, “High Price Record: Cost of Living Now Greatest in American History,” 2. The San Francisco Chronicle, 22 Jan. 1910, 2, “Boycott Spreads to the Atlantic: Workingmen in the East Join in the War on Meat Prices,” reports 50,000 “I don't eat meat” buttons having been manufactured in Baltimore. The Washington Post, 23 Jan. 1910, 1, “No-Meat Army Covers Nation. Thousands Join Boycott Against High Prices,” goes as far as to claim that 600,000 people are enrolled in the boycott in Pittsburg alone.
13 “Boycott Spreads to the Atlantic,” San Francisco Chronicle, 22 Jan. 1910, 2; “Chicago to Join Boycott,” New York Times, 23 Jan. 1910; “No Meat Army Covers Nation,” Washington Post, 23 Jan. 1910, 1.
14 “Thousands to Eat No Meat,” New York Times, 18 Jan. 1910; “Workmen Declare Boycott on Meat,” The Columbian, 20 Jan. 1910; “Meat Prices Take Tumble,” Marion Daily Mirror, 20 Jan. 1910.
15 “Labor in Food War,” Washington Post, 21 Jan. 1910, 1.
16 “To List Food Substitutes,” New York Times, 22 Jan. 1910.
17 “Chicago to Join Boycott,” New York Times, 22 Jan. 1910; “What to Eat – and Why,” New York Times, 30 Jan. 1910.
18 “Meat Prices Climb Again,” New York Times, 3 Feb. 1910; New York Times, 17 March 1910.
19 “Meat Boycott Is Discussed,” San Francisco Chronicle, 24 Jan. 1910.
20 Nusco, “The South Providence Kosher Meat Boycott,” 25.
21 “League to Boycott Trusts,” New York Times, 16 Jan. 1910.
22 MacLeod, “Food Prices,” 368.
23 Haydu, “Frame Brokerage in the Pure Food Movement,” 98.
24 “The Meat Strike Started as a Labor Union Movement,” New York Times, 21 Jan. 1910; “Labor Leads in Movement,” Evening Star, 21 Jan. 1910; “League to Boycott Trusts,” New York Times, 16 Jan. 1910. The CLU was particularly involved in the movement and had contributed to developing the tool of the boycott since its foundation in 1882. Philip S. Foner, History of the labor Movement in the United States, Volume II, From the Founding of the American Federation of Labor to the Emergence of American Imperialism (New York: International Publishers, 1955), 34.
25 “75,000 in Pittsburg Join. Pledges Distributed in the Streets – Unions Lead the Boycott,” New York Times, 22 Jan. 1910.
26 The importance of this tool was manifested by early publications on its significance for the labor struggle in the United States, such as Harry W. Laidler's Boycott and the Labor Struggle: Economic and Legal Aspects, published in 1914, or Leo Wolman's The Boycott in American Trade Unions, published in 1916.
27 Philip Foner, History of the Labor Movement in the United States, Volume III, The Policies and Practices of the American Federation of Labor (New York: International Publishers, 1981), 338–41.
28 Labor Journal, 4 Feb. 1910, 1. E. L. Scharf, the president of the Anti-Food Trust League, was conscious of the legal risks involved in staging a boycott, and he painstakingly explained to a House Committee of the District of Columbia that what the league was proposing was in fact not a boycott, but a “discontinuance” of “the use of any particular food article.” In answering a question of the chairman on the difference between such proceedings and a boycott, he replied, “I have asked advice of the ablest attorneys in Washington before we went into this thing, because I was told that we might be treading on dangerous ground. This advice is to the effect that we can go on, and they said: ‘You can refuse to eat or you can agree to eat what you please, but you must not recommend to anyone not to buy from any particular concern, and not attack any enterprise that is at present a legal entity’.” Report of Hearings on H.R. 16925, To Regulate the Storage of Food Products in the District of Columbia – United States. Congress. House. Committee on the District of Columbia. Subcommittee on Investigation of Food Storage and Prices, clii.
29 “More Give Up Meat,” Washington Post, 24 Jan. 1910, 1.
30 “Workmen Declare Boycott on Meat,” The Columbian, 20 Jan. 1910.
31 “Little Meat for Cleveland,” New York Times, 24 Jan. 1910.
32 “Protests at Meat Boycott: It Will Not Hurt the Beef Trust, but the Producers,” New York Times, 29 Jan. 1910.
33 Glickman, A Living Wage, 7.
34 “A Childish Boycott,” Appeal to Reason, 29 Jan. 1910, 4.
35 “Shot in the Stomach,” Appeal to Reason, 12 Feb. 1910, 4.
36 C. B. Wells, “The Meat Strike,” Weekly People, 5 Feb. 1910.
37 Marcy, Mary E., “The Cause of Rising Prices,” International Socialist Review, 10, 9 (March 1910), 769–74Google Scholar, 774.
38 Glickman, A Living Wage, 116.
39 Kathryn Kish Sklar, “The Consumers’ White Label Campaign of the National Consumers’ League, 1898–1918,” in Susan Strasser, Charles McGovern, and Matthias Judt, eds., Getting and Spending: European and American Consumer Societies in the Twentieth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 22.
40 “No Meat Army Covers Nation,” Washington Post, 23 Jan. 1910, 1.
41 “Dealers Ridicule Boycott Here,” New York Times, 23 Jan. 1910.
42 Haydu, Jeffrey, “Consumer Citizenship and Cross-class Activism: The Case of the National Consumers’ League, 1899–1918,” Sociological Forum, 29, 3 (2014), 628–49, 629CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Other organizations, such as the Mothers’ Club in Berkeley, also saw the boycott as a controversial tool, but one that was necessary under the circumstances, to avoid violence: “Women recoil from such drastic movements as boycotts, but in this case it seems to be the only alternative and vastly better than the riots which might follow should the prices go much higher and the feeling become stronger.” San Francisco Chronicle, 24 Jan. 1910.
43 New York Times, 21 Jan. 1910, 31 Jan. 1910, 17 March 1910; Evening Star, 21 Jan. 1910.
44 Twarog, Politics of the Pantry, 11.
45 Jacobs, Pocketbook Politics.
46 Turner, Katherine E., How the Other Half Ate: A History of Working-Class Meals at the Turn of the Century (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2014), 60Google Scholar.
47 Dana Frank, “Housewives, Socialists, and the Politics of Food: The 1917 New York Cost-of-Living Protests,” Feminist Studies, 11, 2 (Summer 1985), 255–85, 281–82. Similarly, Lawrence Glickman has shown how the reconceptualization of working-class struggle through consumption led to complex arguments seeking both to enhance women's importance in these struggles and to belittle their significance as independent political actors. Glickman, A Living Wage, 116–24.
48 Jane Ziegelman, 97 Orchard: An Edible History of Five Immigrant Families in One New York Tenement (New York: HarperCollins, 2010); Donna Gabaccia, We Are What We Eat: Ethnic Food and the Making of Americans (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000), 61.
49 Seth Koven and Sonya Michel, “Womanly Duties: Maternalist Politics and the Origins of Welfare States in France, Germany, Great Britain and the United States, 1880–1920,” American Historical Review, 95, 4 (Oct. 1990), 1076–1108.
50 Megan Elias, “Making Progress in Food,” Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era, 18, 4 (Oct. 2019), 391–96, 392.
51 “Gotham Beef Party,” American Suffragette, 1, 8 (March 1910), 28.
52 T. H. Breen, “‘Baubles of Britain’: The American and Consumer Revolutions of the Eighteenth Century,” Past & Present, 119 (May 1988), 73–104, 98.
53 Twarog, 2.
54 Temma Kaplan, “Female Consciousness and Collective Action: The Case of Barcelona, 1910–1918,” Signs, 7, 3 (Spring 1982), 545–66, 551.
55 “Boycott of Meat Gaining Recruits,” New York Times, 30 Jan. 1910.
56 For an analysis of suffragists’ political use of cooking, see Jessica Derleth, “Kneading Politics: Cookery and the American Woman Suffrage Movement,” Journal of the Gilded Age and the Progressive Era, 17 (2018), 450–74; and Stacy J. Williams, “Personal Prefigurative Politics: Cooking Up an Ideal Society in the Woman’s Temperance and Woman’s Suffrage Movements, 1870–1920,” Sociological Quarterly, 58, 1 (2017), 72–90.
57 Koven and Michel, 1084.
58 “Gotham Beef Party Is Active in Campaign,” Birmingham Herald, 1 Feb. 1910.
59 “Suffragette No-Meat Savories,” American Suffragette, 1, 9 (March 1910), 21.
60 “Milk Trust Inquiry May Reduce Prices,” New York Times, 24 Jan. 1910.
61 Turner, How the Other Half Ate, 86; Egan, Michael, “Organizing Protest in the Changing City: Swill Milk and Social Activism in New York City, 1842–1864,” New York History, 86, 3 (Summer 2005) 205–25Google Scholar; Frank, Dana, “Housewives, Socialists, and the Politics of Food: The 1917 New York Cost-of-Living Protests,” Feminist Studies, 11, 2 (Summer 1985) 255–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
62 For a discussion of the vision of American abundance see Gabaccia, We Are What We Eat; Ziegelman, 97 Orchard; and Lynne Taylor, “Food Riots Revisited,” Journal of Social History, 30, 2 (Winter 1996) 483–96.
63 Amy Bentley and Christy Spackman, “Food Riots: Historical Perspectives,” in David M. Kaplan, ed., Encyclopedia of Food and Agricultural Ethics (Dordrecht: Springer Reference, 2014), 1200–8, 1200.
64 Specht, Joshua, Red Meat Republic: A Hoof-to-Table History of How Beef Changed America (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2019), 23Google Scholar; Twarog, Politics of the Pantry, 14.
65 “Meat Prices Soar,” New York Times, 23 Jan. 1910.
66 “Eat Meat Twice a Week,” New York Times, 25 Jan. 1910.
67 Taylor, 486.
68 Ziegelman, 285; see also Specht, 359.
69 In particular within the home economics movement, which sought to “educate” immigrant palates to American tastes through cooking classes and public kitchens. This movement has given rise to a wealth of books and articles, among which we can quote Chapter 5 of Gabaccia's We Are What We Eat; Elias, Megan, Stir It Up: Home Economics in American Culture (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008)Google Scholar; Goldstein, Carolyn M., Creating Consumers: Home Economists in Twentieth-Century America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Shapiro, Laura, Perfection Salad: Women and Cooking at the Turn of the Century (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008)Google Scholar; Veit, Helen Zoe, Modern Food, Moral Food: Self-Control, Science, and the Rise of Modern American Eating in the Early Twentieth Century (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2015)Google Scholar.
70 A 20 January article (“Boycott on Meats”) in the Democratic Banner, an Ohio newspaper, recounts that in the city of Steubenville, “three hundred families of Serbians, Croations and other foreigners” have gone on a meat strike, and that “this class of foreigners are the biggest meat eaters in the city.”
71 Shprintzen, Adam D., The Vegetarian Crusade: The Rise of an American Reform Movement 1817–1921 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2015), 209Google Scholar.
72 “Too Many Mouths to Feed,” New York Times, 23 Jan. 1910.
73 “The Boycott on Table Meat: A Less Drastic Programme Needed to Achieve Victory,” San Francisco Chronicle, 22 Jan. 1910, 6.
74 Virtue, G. O., “The Meat Packing Investigation,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 34, 4 (Aug. 1920), 626–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
75 MacLeod, “Food Prices, 372.
76 Flynn, Elizabeth Gurley, “Sabotage: The Conscious Withdrawal of the Workers’ Industrial Efficiency (1916),” in Salerno, Salvatore, ed., Direct Action and Sabotage: Three Classic IWW Pamphlets from the 1910s (Oakland, CA: PM Press, 2014), 89–104Google Scholar, 102.