It was a beautiful and massive example of history for me. According to NMAH, this locomotive was a great relief to those people who needed to transport coal and later, to the passengers that would save hours of driving time by using this railroad to travel from New York to Philadelphia. However, there were people who felt that “because the railroad threatened to take business away from the Schuylkill Canal, angry boatmen made futile attempts to sabotage the competition by burning its wooden bridges” (Smithsonian The National Museum of American History ). Eventually, says NMAH, iron would be used to construct the railroad bridge thus “ushering in a new era of engineering.” With this in mind, I think of the moral reasoning that may have taken place as the business owners attempted to interfere with what some considered to be the needed progress of the locomotive. Could the revenue from the locomotive have helped to boost their economy? Did the business people grapple over their choice to foil the progress of the locomotive? Likewise, I would have to consider whether or not social control was a factor in why the locomotive was first introduced in the United States. Could this have been a means of governmental control to ensure that a certain class of individuals be able to achieve a …show more content…
This exhibit was described by NMAH as having a political history because upper class draftees had the privilege to pay someone to fight in their place if their name was drawn and the enactment of the Emancipation Proclamation made poor and working class whites upset over the freeing of black slaves. “When the Emancipation Proclamation was made in the North, it included a provision opening enlistment in the military to African American men. More than 185,000 African American volunteers took up the call and fought to liberate those still held in slavery” (Smithsonian The National Museum of American History). Both the NMAH and NYHS stated that the anger amongst the lower or working class white volunteers and draftees ignited riots in New York that lasted for four days with the unfair lynching of freed blacks and the killing of rich whites. “They attacked African Americans because they thought that white workers were being asked to fight for the freedom of blacks, who would inevitably compete with them for jobs, and because African-Americans were exempt from the draft” (New-York Historical Society). This portion of the exhibit made the biggest impact on me as I read the markers and information provided by the museum. These kinds of actions have been mentioned throughout my life time and it was surreal to see one of these