¹ Many aspects of the theme of southern postwar development are only now being investigated. Thorough studies of leading electronics firms in the South, like Tandy or Texas Instruments, for example, do not exist. See Braun, Ernest and McDonald, Stuart, Revolution in Miniature: The History and Impact of Semiconductor Electronics, 2d ed. (1978; New York, 1982), 55–59Google Scholar; Lubeck, Scott, “Fort Worth Goes High Tech,” Texas Monthly 14 (Jan. 1986): 245Google Scholar; “Texas Rears an Electronic Giant,” Electronic Week 12 (11 Feb. 1957): 8–10Google Scholar. On Scientific Atlanta, another southern high-tech firm, see Sweatt, Jacqueline M., High Tech in Metropolitan Atlanta: Realizing Our Potential (Atlanta, Ga., 1983), 5Google Scholar; on the importance of southern entrepreneurs in the postwar period, see Angel, William D. Jr., “Zenith Revisited: Urban Entrepreneurship and the Sunbelt Frontier,” Social Science Quarterly 61 (1980): 434–45Google Scholar; on the general topic of industrialization in the twentieth-century South, see Cobb, James C., Industrialization and Southern Society, 1877–1984 (Lexington, Ky., 1984), 99–120Google Scholar; Wright, Gavin, Old South, New South: Revolutions in the Southern Economy since the Civil War (New York, 1986), 239–74Google Scholar.

² The idea of recording magnetically had occurred to another inventor, Oberlin Smith, some years earlier, although he never attempted to commercialize the device. Interestingly, one historian claims that a meeting between Smith and Thomas Edison, inventor of the phonograph, provided the inspiration for the magnetic recorder. Smith's recorder and his encounter with Edison are described in Cox, Arthur J. and Malim, Thomas, Ferracute: The History of an American Enterprise (Bridgeton, N.J., 1985), 113Google Scholar; Smith, Oberlin, “Some Possible Forms of the Phonograph,” Electrical World 12 (8 Sept. 1888): 116–17Google Scholar.

³ Poulsen's basic patents include U.S. Patent 661,619 (13 Nov. 1900), granted to Valdemar Poulsen for the “Method of Recording and Reproducing Sound”; U.S. Patent 789,336 (9 May 1905), granted to Valdemar Poulsen and Peder O. Pedersen for the “Telegraphone.”

⁴ Gavey, J., “Telegraphs and Telephones at the Paris Exposition,” The Electrician 46 (23 Nov. 1900): 166–69Google Scholar; Carl Hering, “An American Criticism of the Paris Exhibition,” ibid. (28 Dec. 1900): 364–67; Robert Angus, “75 Years of Magnetic Recording,” High Fidelity, March 1973, 42.

⁵ The American Telegraphone Company, promotional material in the William J. Hammer Collection, Archives, National Museum of American History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C; “O'Reilly Suit in Washington Court,” Springfield Republican, 23 March 1920Google Scholar; “To Make Telegraphones Here,” Springfield Daily Republican, 9 Nov. 1910. One firm, the Federal Telegraph Company of California, attempted to use the Telegraphone to transmit recorded telegraph messages by radio. The idea was to save transmitting time. The company folded, but the Telegraphone scheme seems to have worked adequately. Aitken, Hugh G. J., The Continuous Wave: Technology and American Radio, 1900–1932 (Princeton, N.J., 1985), 130–33Google Scholar; on the history of American Telegraphone, see Clark, Mark H., “The History of Magnetic Recording in the United States” (Ph.D. diss., University of Delaware, 1992Google Scholar).

⁶ U.S. Patent 1,640,881 (30 Aug. 1927), granted to Wendell Carlson and Glenn W. Carpenter for a “Radio Telegraph System”; Hickman, C. N., “Sound Recording on Magnetic Tape,” Bell System Technical Journal 16 (1937): 165–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hickman, , “Delayed Speech,” Bell Laboratories Record 11 (1933): 308–10Google Scholar; R. F. Mallina, “A Mirror for the Voice,” ibid., 13 (1935): 200–202. AT&T's research in magnetic recording was actually quite extensive, although it did not result in any commercial product until after the Second World War; see Clark, Mark, “Suppressing Innovation: Bell Laboratories and Magnetic Recording,” Technology and Culture 34 (1993): 516–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷ Naarischwily, A., “Neue Versuche mit dem Telegraphon,” Elektrotechnische Zeitschrift 22 (Sept. 1921): 1068Google Scholar; BBC Yearbook, 1932 (London, 1932), 366–68Google Scholar; “Magnetic Recording and Reproducing,” Wireless World 34 (5 Jan. 1934): 8–10Google Scholar; “BBC Recording Service,” The Electrician 122 (March 1935): 304–5Google Scholar.

⁸ Hansen, W. H., “Das Magnetophon,” Elektrotechnische Zeitschrift 56 (7 Nov. 1935): 1232Google Scholar.

⁹ A modern analysis of the way recording on coated tapes works can be found in Mee, C. D., The Physics of Magnetic Recording (1964; paper ed., New York, 1986), 176–81Google Scholar; technical details of the Magnetophone and its tape can be found in British Patent 459,884 (18 Jan. 1937) granted to IG Farben for an “Improved Magnetic Sound Record Carrier”; British Patent 466,023 (18 May 1937) granted to IG Farben for “Improvements in the Manufacture and Production of Sound Record Carriers”; U.S. Government, Department of Commerce, Report PB 385 (Washington, D.C., n.d.). PB 385Google Scholar was a reprint of a report by SHAEF, Combined Intelligence Objectives Sub-Committee, G-2 Section, Chemical Warfare and Miscellaneous Chemical Section, “I. G. Farbenindustrie, A.G., Ludwigshafen and Oppau au Rhein. Wehrmacht Items,” by J. G. Kern, et al. (n.p., 1945). An overview of the development of the Magnetophone is available in U.S., Department of Commerce, Report PB 79558 (Washington, D.C., n.d.)Google Scholar. This is a reprint of Col. Ranger, Richard H., “Further Studies in Magnetophones and Tapes,” FIAT Final Report 923 (n.p., 1947Google Scholar).

¹⁰ “Interview with John Herbert Orr,” by Carl Voelcker, 21 Jan. 1981, Audio Tape Collection, Auburn University Archives, Auburn, Ala. [hereafter, AU Tape]; [John Herbert Orr], “Brief Biographical Sketch, John Herbert Orr,” typescript, n.d. [c. 1975], accession 84–33, John Herbert Orr Collection, Auburn University Archives, Auburn, Ala. [hereafter, JHO Collection].

¹¹ John Herbert Orr, “Orradio Irish Tape Story” (tape recording, n.d. [c. 1955]); U.S. Department of the Navy to Orr, 26 April 1943; Orr to Ray C. Ellis, 19 Feb. 1943—all accession 84–103, JHO Collection. Davidson Taylor to General Robert A. McClure, 15 March 1945; Michael Barkway to Major Raymond K. Fried, 3 Oct. 1944; Davidson Taylor, “List of Personnel,”; William Paley to Major Raymond K. Fried; Orr to Supply and Transport Section [SHAEF], 13 June 1945—all “Supreme Headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Force, Special Staff, Psychological Warfare Division, Executive Branch,” Records of World War II, National Archives, Washington, D.C.

¹² Pogue, Forrest C., The U.S. Army in World War II, The European Theater of Operations: The Supreme Command (Washington, D.C., 1954), 336–37Google Scholar. Supreme Headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Force, Psychological Warfare Division, The Psychological Warfare Division, Supreme Headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Force: An Account of Its Operations in the Western European Campaign, 1944–1945 (Bad Homburg, Germany, 1945), 39–40Google Scholar; John Herbert Orr, “To Whom it May Concern,” unpub. MS, accession 84–103, JHO Collection.

¹³ Several different versions of the Magnetophone were brought to the United States by FIAT personnel, though most were probably the model K-4. The K-4 was less advanced electronically than the K-7 but incorporated many of the same mechanical elements, including the tape transport. Other versions of the Magnetophone included a mainspring-operated portable unit and a stereophonic unit. The removal of these machines from Germany and the existence of American-sponsored scientific and technical missions were public knowledge as early as 1946. U.S. Department of Commerce, Report PB 79558, 3, 46, 61–62; U.S. Department of Commerce, Report PB 12659 (Washington, D.C., n.d.), 19Google Scholar; U.S. Department of Commerce, Report 3586 (Washington, D.C.., n.d.), 3Google Scholar; “Industry Getting Nazi Secrets,” Business Week, 22 Sept. 1946, 46–52; Don V. R. Drenner, “Engineer Finds Magnetophon [sic] Superior,” Broadcasting, 19 Nov. 1945, 36, 84; Drenner, , “The Magnetophon,” Audio Engineering 31 (Oct. 1947): 7–11, 35Google Scholar. Technical features of the Magnetophone were also observed by examination of a K-4 in the possession of the School of Electrical Engineering, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama.

¹⁴ Orr, “To Whom it May Concern,” 1–2; Orr to Lewis Lind, 12 July 1956, both accession 84–103, JHO Collection.

¹⁵ George Zazali, telephone interview with author, 13 Feb. 1989; ibid., 5 Aug. 1991; Orr to John S. Gardner, 25 July 1947; Richard H. Ranger to Orr, 14 Nov. 1947; Orr to John Gardner, 5 Jan. 1948; Richard H. Ranger to Orr, 24 Feb. 1948; Orr, “Narrative History of and by John Herbert Orr Relating to Information and Samples of Magnetic Oxide Obtained in Germany in Summer 1945. Interrogator Al Johnston. Persons Present William Sanford, Joseph Aires, Edward T. Newton, and George M. Hopkins on November 14, 1956 at the Office of William T. Sanford, Opelika, Al.,” tape recording, reel 2 of 6—all in accession 84–103, JHO Collection.

¹⁶ Gimbel, John, Science, Technology and Reparations: Exploitation and Plunder in Postwar Germany (Stanford, Calif., 1990), 72–73Google Scholar. The overall impact of the FIAT program is still being debated. Some industries clearly gained valuable knowledge, but the commercial value of the investigations for other industries may have been minimal. See the review of Gimbel's, book in Technology and Culture 32 (1991): 1122–24Google Scholar.

¹⁷ Ibid.; Lindsay, Harold and Stolaroff, Myron, “Magnetic Tape Recorder of Broadcast Quality,” Audio Engineering 32 (Oct. 1948): 13–16Google Scholar; Ampex founder Alexander Poniatoff hired an engineer named John T. Mullin, who had formerly worked with FIAT. Mullin, an associate of Richard Ranger at FIAT, brought two complete Magnetophones back from Germany. He met Poniatoff following his demonstration of the Magnetophone to the Institute of Radio Engineers convention in 1946. John T. Mullin, “Creating the Craft of Tape Recording,” High Fidelity Magazine, April 1976, 62–67; Norman Eisenberg, “High Fidelity Pathfinders—The Men Who Made an Industry: Alexander M. Poniatoff,” ibid., Sept. 1977, 72–73. William Speed of the New York-based Audio Devices Corporation, for example, brought his knowledge of the Magnetophone directly from Germany. In 1947 Audio Devices introduced a line of recording tape made virtually to German specifications. 3M began manufacturing small batches of a coated, paper-based tape on a contract basis for the Brash Development company in the mid-1940s. Brush developed a line of recorders similar to the German product in the early 1940s, although they were little noticed until after the war. When Magnetophones and American copies began appearing in 1945–46, 3M began planning to expand its magnetic tape capacity. The firm hired chemists and engineers, studied samples of German tape, and devised formulations that would allow them to make paper- and acetate-based tapes on existing tape-coating machinery (used to make their adhesive tape line). By 1949, 3M's tape-making facility used equipment dedicated to that purpose, and the firm maintained a growing staff of researchers working on problems of formulation and coating. Larry Lueck, formerly of 3M, telephone interview with the author, 28 Aug. 1993.

¹⁸ William Brassell, interview with the author, 26 Feb. 1991, Opelika, Ala.

¹⁹ Ibid.; George Zazali, interview; Krammer, Arnold, Nazi Prisoners of War in America (New York, 1979), 185, 205–6Google Scholar. In the 1950s the Armour Institute of Technology patented the basic design for German-style tape, sold an exclusive license to 3M, and then boldly brought suit against all the other tape manufacturers for infringement. The suit was dismissed before Orradio's case went to court; see “U.S. Court Invalidates a Patent Pertaining to a Magnetic Tape,” The New York Times, 4 March 1959.

²⁰ Orr to Richard Ranger, 4 April 1950; “Information Regarding Orradio Industries, Inc.,” typescript, n.d., both accession 84–103, JHO Collection; John Herbert Orr, “The Magic of Magnetic Tape,” unpub. MS, 1958, accession 84–33, JHO Collection.

²¹ Sam L. Ackerman to Orr, 24 April 1951, accession 84–103, JHO Collection.

²² U.S., Department of Commerce, Report PB 79558, 2; Rangertone, Inc., invoice number 150, 4 Aug. 1948, ibid.; “Seven Tape Recorders and a Wire Recorder,” Consumers' Research Bulletin 25 (Jan. 1950): 15–17Google Scholar.

²³ Bigwood, , “Applications of Magnetic Recording in Network Broadcasting,” Audio Engineering 32 (July 1948): 31–33, 38, 40Google Scholar; Richard S. O'Brien, “Adapting Paper Tape Recorders for Broadcasting,” ibid. 31 (June 1947): 10–14.

²⁴ [Semi Joseph Begun], “The New Steel Tone Tape Machine,” Electrical Communication 15 (July 1936): 62–69Google Scholar. One Brush design was manufactured by General Electric and marketed to the Army: “Invasion Recorder,” General Electric Review 47 (July 1944): 44–45Google Scholar.

²⁵ Chase, Herbert, “Designing Wire Recorder Unit for Low-Cost Quantity Production,” Electrical Manufacturing 39 (Jan. 1947): 122–25Google Scholar.

²⁶ “Electronic Dictation,” Purchasing 19 (Dec. 1945): 116–17Google Scholar; Berleben, Karl A., “Audio Equipment Survey: Part Three, Wire Recorders,” Audio-Visual Guide 14 (Feb. 1948): 9Google Scholar; “Storing Sounds on Spools,” Popular Science 150 (April 1947): 144–48Google Scholar; Camras, Marvin, “A New Magnetic Wire Recorder,” Radio News 30 (Nov. 1943): 3–5Google Scholar; “Industrial Research Progress at Armour Research Foundation, 1944–45,” Chemical and Engineering News 24 (Jan. 1946): 161–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “Wire Recorder,” Business Week, 15 March 1947, 24. The average prices are based on a sample of eleven wire recorders and eighteen tape recorders offered for sale in 1950. Recorders with extra features such as built-in radios or phonographs and recorders priced over $300 were excluded. The latter were marketed as professional or special-purpose devices. “Recorder Specifications,” Tele-Tech, April 1950, 34–38.

²⁷ For contemporary accounts of the emergence of high fidelity as a popular fad, see “Pleasant Sound,” Time, Jan. 1958, 40; Conly, John M., “Hi-Fi for All,” Atlantic Monthly 194 (Sept. 1954): 89–93Google Scholar; on the new generation of consumer tape recorders, see Robert Oakes Jordan, “Introducing Tape Recorders,” Saturday Review of Literature, 29 May 1954, 36–37. The popularization of high fidelity corresponded with an increase in the sales of tape and tape equipment during the 1950s.

²⁸ Although all tape recorders used the German standard for tape width, recordings were not necessarily transferable between machines. Some machines recorded with the oxide-coated side of the tape facing “in,” whereas on others the oxide faced out. When half-track recording was introduced, some machines recorded the bottom half of the tape as “side one,” while others used the top half. Similarly, although most manufacturers adhered to the German standard for tape speed, a few machines ran slightly faster or slower.

²⁹ C. P. Fagan, “The Manufacture of Magnetic Tapes,” Plastics, Sept. 1953, 323–24.

³⁰ Graves, John T., History of the Southern Research Institute (Birmingham, Ala., 1955Google Scholar); Herbert Hard, Jr., telephone interview with the author, 17 April 1989, AU Tape; “Interview with Herbert Hard, Jr.,” by Carl Voelcker, 3 June 1984, AU Tape. The shedding of oxide during recording and replay tended to result in a buildup on tape recorder heads. Occasionally, the oxide clogged the tape head gaps, resulting in decreased performance.

³¹ Herbert Hard, Jr., telephone interview with the author, 17 April 1989, AU Tape; Herbert Hard, Jr., telephone interview with the author, 31 July 1993.

³² Herbert Hard, Jr., telephone interview with the author, 17 April 1989, AU Tape; Herbert Hard, Jr., telephone interview with the author, 31 July 1993.

³³ Nathaniel Welch, interview with the author, 31 July 1993, Atlanta, Ga.

³⁴ “Interview with Nathaniel Welch,” by the author, AU Tape; [Nathaniel Welch], “Irish Magnetic Recording Tape Jobber Price List, February 20, 1960”; [Nathaniel Welch], “Webcor Distributors Handling Irish Tape,” 10 Nov. 1959; [Nathaniel Welch], ”V-M Dealers Who Handle Irish Tape,” 6 Nov. 1959; [Nathaniel Welch], untitled typescript listing Irish tape sales representatives, 12 May 1960; [Nathaniel Welch], “Sales May 1958—April 1959 Compared with May 1959–April 1960”—all from a collection in the possession of Nathaniel Welch. Welch's system of distribution was not an original idea, as other manufacturers of consumer electronics products also adopted the same system during this time. Aside from changes in the types of retail outlets where electronic items are sold, this system is still in place. Weinberg, Art, “Marketing and Distribution of Consumer Electronics Products,” IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics CE–30 (May 1984): 97–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “Records and Tape,” Electrical Merchandising, Jan. 1959, 220.

³⁵ Orr to Nathaniel Welch, 5 June 1953, accession 84–103, JHO Collection; Richard Hammer, “Versatile Tape: A New Method of Recording Is Rapidly Coming of Age,” Barron's 10 Sept. 1956, 6.

³⁶ Nathaniel Welch, interview with the author, 31 July 1993, Atlanta, Ga.; Orradio Industries, Inc., sales memoranda, Nathaniel Welch collection.

³⁷ “Interview with Nathaniel Welch,” by the author, AU Tape; Welch, interview with the author, 31 July 1993; advertising proofs, Orradio Industries, Inc., c. 1955–60, Nathaniel Welch collection.

³⁸ Problems with consistency in the plastic base were solved partly by the introduction of a higher-quality, Mylar plastic tape in the mid-1950s. The expansion of Orradio's production capability during these years permitted the introduction of this new plastic material, because Orr was able to conclude a favorable deal for large quantities of this expensive but far superior material from the maker, Du Pont. Herbert Hard, Jr., interview, AU Tape; Herbert Hard, Jr., telephone interview with the author, 31 July 1993; [John Herbert Orr], “Speech Outline,” typescript, n.d. [c. 1955]; Richard Ranger to Orr, 27 Dec. 1949, both accession 84–103, JHO Collection.

³⁹ Kranzberg, Melvin, “From Carpetbag to Carpet Mill: Technology in the New South,” in The Southern Mystique: The Impact of Technology on Hutnan Values in a Changing Region, ed. Lewis, W. David and Griessman, B. Eugene (Tuscaloosa, Ala., 1977), 42Google Scholar.

⁴⁰ Elmer Rhodes, interview with the author, July 1993, Atlanta, Ga.; Herbert Hard, Jr., interview with the author, 17 April 1989, AU Tape; Herbert Hard, Jr., telephone interview with the author, 31 July 1993.

⁴¹ C. Allen Lindquist, C. K. Williams Company, telephone interview with the author, 21 June 1989, AU Tape.

⁴² Ibid.; “Orradio Buys Compco Reel Division,” Photo Trade News, Sept. 1954, n.p.; J. D. Walton, “Tentative Design for Pilot Plant for Converting a Fe2O3 → Fe2O + H2O → Γ Fe2O,” drawing, 7 May 1954, accession 84–103, JHO Collection; Engineering Experiment Station of the Georgia Institute of Technology, “Tentative Proposal for Experimental Program of Methods of Manufacturing Gamma-Ferric Oxide” (confidential laboratory report, 21 April 1954), ibid.; LeRoy A. Woodward to Herbert Hard, Jr., 30 April 1954, ibid. The Engineering Experiment Station also conducted other projects for Orradio, including one intended to develop a new way of mixing iron oxide emulsions (a critical operation in tape making that in part determines the evenness of the coating). Walter Herbert Burrows, “Dispersion of Iron Oxide, project A-152, progress report” (confidential laboratory report, 30 Sept. 1958), GTRI records, Archives, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Ga.

⁴³ In 1957, the market for this radically new consumer technology already established, representatives of various manufacturers formed the national Magnetic Recording Industry Association. The MRIA functioned alongside existing consumer electronics industry organizations like die Radio, Electronics and Television Manufacturer's Association. Both the existence and the functions of this organization indicated that a mature, established industry had sprung up in the decade after 1947. Chief among the association's functions was the setting of mechanical and electrical standards for tape recording. Not surprisingly, many standards derived directly from Magnetophone specifications. Since most manufacturers had long since accepted these de facto specifications, there was little quibbling in the formalization of them. As new applications were discovered for magnetic recording products, the MRIA made it easier for Orradio and other companies to adapt its products to market needs by providing industry-wide technical specifications. A list of exhibitors at the 1955 Audiorama Exposition represents virtually every domestic manufacturer of audio equipment, including Orradio. Audio Fair … Hi-Fi (n.p.: AudioFair-Video-Fair, Inc., 1955), 58–75; Edward Tatnall Canby, “Magnetic Tape at the Audio Fair,” Saturday Review of Literature, 28 Oct. 1950, 84; Herbert Hard, Jr., interview with the author, 17 April 1989, AU Tape.

⁴⁴ Orradio sales figures were compiled from annual reports in the Nathaniel Welch collection; “Orradio Industries, Inc., Opelika, Alabama, Statement of Income and Expenses,” typescript, n.d. [1953]; [Nathaniel Welch], “Memo to all Reps,” 15 Jan. 1958; “Orradio Industries, Inc., Special Letter to Stockholders,” 31 Dec. 1954—all in the Nathaniel Welch collection; “Consumer Electronics,” Electrical Merchandising, Jan. 1959, 90.

⁴⁵ Leo G. Killian, “Data Recording on Magnetic Tape,” Electronic Industries and Electronic Instrumentation, April 1948, 3, 5, 31; Lichty, Lawrence and Topping, Malachi C., American Broadcasting: A Sourcebook on the History of Radio and Television (New York, 1975), 70Google Scholar; Robinson, Joseph F., Videotape Recording: Theory and Practice (London, 1975), 17Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ Unfortunately, almost no company records pertaining to Orradio's employees are available. Several dozen of the 200 or so employees in the late 1950s were small stockholders, according to company records in the Nathaniel Welch collection; most of the workers were white women, and the factory remained non-unionized. For other information about workers I have relied on the statements of Orradio's first employee, William Brassell, who acted as production supervisor during the late 1940s and 1950s. William Brassell, interview with the author, 4 May 1991, Opelika, Ala. The style of Orr's leadership is comparable to that of other owners of small companies described by Blackford, Mansel in A History of Small Business in America (New York, 1991), 87–88Google Scholar.

⁴⁷ John Jipp to Orr, 20 Aug. 1956; Orr to Dr. J. H. Braunmuhl, 13 March 1959, both in accession 84–103, JHO Collection; “Ampex, Orradio Pool Talents,” Electronic Week, 29 April 1957, 21; “Orrox Corporation,” typescript, n.d.; and Orrtronic Service Manual (Opelika, Ala.: Orrtronic Corporation, n.d.), both in accession 84–88, JHO Collection; “John Herbert Orr, Industrialist, Dies” Birmingham [Alabama] News, 7 May 1984.

⁴⁸ Innovation is, of course, one of the hallmarks of small business. See, for example, Acs, Zoltan J. and Audretsch, David B., Innovation and Small Firms (New York, 1990), 50–58Google Scholar; Blackford, Mansel G., “Small Business in America: A Historiographic Survey,” Business History Review 65 (Spring 1991): 1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁹ The ability to compete with 3M in this way is in contrast to many other hightechnology firms, which typically develop a customized product and exploit market niches considered by larger firms to be too small to be worth pursuing. See, for example, a study of 123 manufacturing firms (including both high- and low-technology companies) in New York by Young, Ruth C. and Francis, Joe D., “Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Small Manufacturing Firms,” Social Science Quarterly 72 (March 1991): 149–62Google Scholar; also see Blackford, A History of Small Business in America, 37–38; and Ingham, John, Making Iron and Steel: Independent Mills in Pittsburgh, 1820–1920 (Columbus, Ohio, 1991Google Scholar).

⁵⁰ Orr in many ways fits the model set out by Harold C. Livesay's studies of entrepreneurs. See “Entrepreneurial Dominance in Businesses Large and Small, Past and Present,” in Business History Review 63 (Spring 1989): 1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar.