1. Hughes, Networks of Power, 285-265, 369; "Distribution of Central Station Energy, 1920-1930," Electrical World 97 (January 3, 1931): 28; "Revenue of the Electric Light and Power Industry," ibid., 97 (January 3, 1931): 28. Nye believes utility resistance to the home market largely disappeared in the 1920s; see Nye, Electrifying America, 261; see also Platt, The Electric City, 235-245, 253-261; and Rose, Cities of Light and Heat, passim.

2. The statistic was provided by the president of the National Electric Light Association in an address in 1930 and cited in the editorial, "A Word of Warning," Electrical World 96 (September 13, 1930): 471.

3. See table AII.7.5, "Percentage Distribution of Energy and Electricity to Manufacturing and Nonresidential Use," in Sidney Sonenblum, Appendix II, "Basic Statistical Data: Long-Term Quantitative Trends," p. 426 in Sam H. Schurr et al., Electricity, Milton F. Searl, "The Growth of Electricity Consumption in Historical Perspective," pp. 342-343, in Schurr, Electricity, esp. pp. 343-346, figs. AI.2 and AI.3. For electrification of the factory, see Nye, Electrifying America, 184-237. For an economic examination of electrification of industrial power processes, see Schurr, Electricity; see especially the overviews by Warren D. Devine, Jr., ''Electrified Mechanical Drive: The Historical Power Distribution Revolution," ibid., pp. 21-42, and Sidney Sonenblum, "Electrification and Productivity Growth in Manufacturing," ibid., pp. 277-423, which provides a four-stage history for the application and development of electricity in manufacturing production. Sonenblum's footnotes contain extensive citations to the historical literature. See also Sidney Sonenblum and Sam H. Schurr, "Electricity Use and Energy Conservation," ibid., pp. 325-339, where the rapidity of application of electricity to manufacturing in the 1920s is explained, from the manufacturing user's point of view, in terms of the increase of productivity and savings due to total energy conservation. The cost-revenue analysis of the residential customer is discussed in "The Residence Consumer—What He Costs and What He Is Worth," Electrical World 81 (June 2, 1923): 1269-1272. On connecting isolated stores to central stations in Chicago, see Platt, The Electric City, 101-103, 107-108.

4. "Outstanding Facts," Electrical World 103 (January 6, 1934): 16. In 1922, 80.3 percent of total customers were residential: "Business Facts for Electrical Men," ibid., 81 (January 13, 1923): 137. For other representative opinion of industrial versus residential electrical sales, see E. S. Hamblen, "Economic Value of Load Diversity," ibid., 78 (July 16, 1921): 110; "The Residence Consumer—What He Costs and What He Is Worth"; "Keeping Dollars at Work," ibid., 85 (March 28, 1925): 658-660; "An Industry Balance Sheet," ibid., 87 (May 8, 1926): 971-982. The ten-year projection was pro-

vided by Robert M. Davis, "Looking Ahead Ten Years," ibid., 83 (January 5, 1924): 17-24. Before World War I, the telephone industry similarly targeted the industry and business markets, leaving development of the residential market until the 1920s and 1930s; see Fischer, America Calling, 42-50.

5. "It would appear" quoted from Charles J. Russell (vice president, Philadelphia Electric Company), "Philadelphia Residence Studies," Electrical World 87 (May 8, 1926): 1004. "Actual demand" quoted from C. F. Lacombe (consulting engineer, New York), "The Competitive Market for Domestic Electric Service," ibid., 89 (May 28, 1927): 1140.

6. Electrical World estimated in 1929 that only 20 percent of private utility electric customers were capable of buying "complete electrical service"; see "This Domestic Business," ibid., 93 (May 25, 1929): 1033; "prospects" quoted from ibid., p. 1037. Market survey in Lacombe, "The Competitive Market," 1139-1147. On market segmentation, see ibid., 1140, and ''Relation of Appliance Sales to Family Income," ibid., 86 (September 12, 1925): 523-524. On the basis of aggregate data, Platt believes that Chicago Edison successfully marketed to the suburban middle class, in addition to the "luxury" class, in the 1920s but does not know the share of total households comprised by these groups in order to test the utility's claims; see Platt, The Electric City, 240-252, esp. table 30, p. 251. On utility marketing, see Nye, Electrifying America, 262-287, and table 6.1, p. 268; and Rose, Cities of Light and Heat, 65-109, 112-146 on marketing to and educating upper-class consumers. Sicilia argues that Boston Edison targeted the home luxury market before World War I and afterward included the middle-class consumer but implies that the upscale bias continued in the 1920s; see David B. Sicilia, "Selling Power: Marketing and Monopoly at Boston Edison, 1886-1929" (Ph.D. dissertation, Brandeis University, 1991), 330, 373, 467-469, 486-489. Before the 1920s, phone companies similarly ignored lower-income households; see Fischer, America Calling, 108-109.

7. Fischer, America Calling, 75-80, 260; Lacombe, "The Competitive Market," 1139-1147. I found only one organized effort by the utility industry in the 1920s to understand housekeeping. In 1925, the National Electric Light Association cooperated with the General Federation of Women's Clubs to survey households for the home equipment they contained. See Mrs. John D. Sherman, president of the General Federation of Women's Clubs, "Home Making an Occupation," Electrical World 87 (May 22, 1926): 1124-1125. Sicilia's discussion of Boston Edison's innovative marketing strategies in the 1920s shows how far most companies, who did not follow Edison, had to go; see Sicilia, "Selling Power," 465-560.

8. "Almost a total" quoted from "The Residence Consumer—What He Costs and What He Is Worth," Electrical World 81 (June 2, 1923): 1269; Alex Dow, "Evolution of Rate Making," ibid., 84 (September 20, 1924): 629-631; Platt, The Electric City, 82-89, 98-99, 127-137, on the history of rate making and Samuel Insull's role. Platt's discussion of the role of gas utility rate setting, The Electric City, 127-130, helps explain the political dynamics in electrical rate setting. See also Forrest McDonald, Insull (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962). Chandler emphasizes the role of accounting in enabling producers to enter mass production, but more research is needed to evaluate the importance of inadequate accounting relative to other constraints; see Alfred D. Chandler, Jr., The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business (Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1977), 445-450.

9. "As a matter of fact" quoted from "Domestic Load and the Lesson of the Factory," Electrical World 87 (May 1, 1926): 904; George H. Davis (Idaho Power Company, Boise), "Does Residence Business Pay?" ibid., 80 (December 1922): 1398-1399; John L. Haley,

"Revised Rate Structures," ibid., 92 (October 20, 1928): 791; Fischer, America Calling, 38-42.

10. "Hartford's Combination Residence Rate," Electrical World 91 (April 21, 1928): 917-921; Samuel Ferguson (president, Hartford Electric Light Company), "Inducement Rates, Key to Progress," ibid., 93 (March 2, 1929): 435-437; "Customer Psychology,'' ibid., 93 (April 20, 1929): 787-789; "Promotional Rates Improve Usage Classification," ibid., 94 (July 27, 1929): 1919-1920; "Three-Cent Energy Rate for Hartford Homes," ibid., 96 (November 8, 1930): 850.

11. C. L. Campbell, "Residential Rates That Encourage Use," Electrical World 86 (December 19, 1925): 1249-1250; "Low Rates Attract Domestic Power Load," ibid., 90 (September 24, 1927), 619; John L. Haley, "Revised Rate Structures," ibid., 92 (October 20, 1928): 791-793; C. F. Lacombe and W. S. Leffler, "Defects of Straight-Line Rate," ibid., 93 (February 2, 1929): 243-246; Barclay J. Sickler, "Lower Rates—More Business," ibid., 95 (May 3, 1930): 888-889; "New York City Offered Lower Rates," ibid., 96 (August 9, 1930): 257-258; "Promotional Rates Quicken Commercial Pulse," ibid., 98 (August 1, 1931): 207; "Rates Go Down, Consumption Goes Up," ibid., 98 (November 21, 1931): 908; "Sixteen Months to Recover with Inducement Rates," ibid., 98 (December 19, 1931): 1084-1086; F. A. Newton, "This Business of Rates," ibid., 101 (June 10, 1933): 769-773.

12. See the negotiations of New York Edison with New York State in 1930 in "Sloan for 5-Cent Rate Plus 60 Cents—Boston and Philadelphia Rates Cut," Electrical World 96 (August 9, 1930): 240-241.

13. "Interest has" quoted from "Selling Centers on Homes," Electrical World 105 (January 5, 1935): 60. "While private" quoted from Richard F. Hirsh, Technology and Transformation in the American Electric Utility (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 35; see also pp. 33-35. Table AII.7.5, "Percentage Distribution of Energy and Electricity to Manufacturing and Nonresidential Use," in Sonenblum, "Basic Statistical Data," 426.

14. On General Electric's advertising campaign, see Nye, Electrifying America, 268-271. Electrical manufacturing establishments from Table I, "Thirteen Years' Growth in Electrical Manufacturing," in "Value of Electrical Goods Doubled in Eight Years," Electrical World 94 (October 26, 1929): 837; the data refer to all electrical manufacturers, including makers of appliances. On General Electric, see David Loth, Swope of G.E.: The Story of Gerard Swope and General Electric in American Business (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1958), 113-116, 132-133, 144-148, 164-166, 180.

15. On the relationship between electrical manufacturers and operating utilities, see Sidney Alexander Mitchell, S. Z. Mitchell and the Electrical Industry (New York: Farrar, Straus & Cudahy, 1960), 62-151. Mitchell's biography defends the holding company movement from the industry point of view. Gifford Pinchot portrayed General Electric as one of the five electric trusts; see "Pinchot Tells of Trust with Five Heads," Electrical World 90 (December 3, 1927): 1164. See also Ralph G. M. Sultan, Pricing in the Electrical Oligopoly, vol. 1, Competition or Collusion (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1974), 1-36. On electrical manufacturers' ownership of utilities, see also Hughes, Networks of Power, 126-129; on holding companies, ibid., 392-402. Hughes interprets holding companies as the natural outcome of operating utility growth and considers his research a correction of misunderstanding of holding companies in the 1920s due to government investigations and criticisms by public power advocates.

16. Table III, "Value of Electrical Manufactures by Classes," in "Value of Electrical

Goods Doubled in Eight Years," Electrical World 94 (October 26, 1929): 838. On G.E. product diversity, see Loth, Swope, 114, and Jules Backman, The Economics of the Electrical Machinery Industry (New York: New York University Press, 1962), 4. Thomas Hughes argues that military research was a major source of industrial invention by World War I; see Hughes, American Genesis, 96-137. On G.E. investment figures, dollar amounts refer to 1953; the report does not state the dollar amount for earlier administrative guidelines on capital requests; see W. C. Wichman (vice president-general manager, Industrial Power Components Division), "The Product Division General Manager's Responsibilities and Role in Planning and Control," in Controllers Institute of America: A Case Study of Management Planning and Control at General Electric Company (New York: Controllership Foundation, 1955), 23-28. On divisional competition, I rely on General Electric's practices; see Robert W. Lewis, "Measuring, Reporting and Appraising Results of Operations with Reference to Goals, Plans and Budgets,'' in Controllers, Case Study, 29-41. On General Electric research, see George Wise, Willis R. Whitney, General Electric, and the Origins of U.S. Industrial Research (New York: Columbia University Press, 1985), 170-171; John Winthrop Hammond, Men and Volts: The Story of General Electric (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1941), 325 f.; and Ronald R. Kline, Steinmetz: Engineer and Socialist (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992).

17. Ralph Sultan demonstrated the "stickiness" of prices in electrical equipment destined for industrial purchasers after the three major corporations—G.E., Westinghouse, and Allis-Chambers—worked out their market shares; see Sultan, Pricing, 1-36, 37-83, 170-193. Sultan concludes, despite oral testimony of informal price fixing among electrical manufacturers and several prosecuted cases of collusion to fix prices, that the market for apparatus was not conspiratorially "administered" and that a combination of market forces and technological evolution of products accounts for what appears as price fixing; see ibid., 301-320. On incandescent lamp patent pooling for the purpose of controlling the market, see ibid., 26-28. For Swope's views, see Loth, Swope, 179-180; Hammond, Men and Volts, 389-393. Riverside appliance prices are from an impressionistic sample of the Riverside Daily Press, 1928-1940 (n = 118), conducted for the purposes of illustration.

18. Percentage changes in price calculated from average national retail prices in "10 Years Sales and Retail Value of Electrical Merchandise [1926-1935]," Electrical Merchandising 55 (January 1936): 2-5; "10 Years Sales and Retail Value of Electrical Merchandise [1930-1939]," ibid., 63 (January 1945): 8-9. Unit price determined as aggregate retail value divided by number of retail units sold.

19. "Some representatives" quoted from "Ideal Refrigerator Motor Specified," Electrical World 85 (May 16, 1925): 1051. On the history of refrigerators, see Cowan, More Work for Mother, 127-150, and Anderson, Refrigeration in America . Anderson's story of the advance of technology can be read backward as the persistence of technological failings; ibid., 195-200. My discussion of problems with mass market mechanical refrigeration draws from the following sources: "Electrical Refrigerating Outfits Moving Well," Electrical World 81 (April 1923): 1006; "Electric Refrigeration in Chicago," ibid., 84 (December 20, 1924): 1316; "Better Motors Wanted for Refrigerators," ibid., 85 (February 28, 1925): 484; "To Find the Ideal Refrigerator Motor," ibid., 85 (March 7, 1925): 496; "Ideal Refrigerator Motor Specified," ibid., 85 (May 16, 1925): 1051; "Domestic Electric Refrigeration Featured," ibid., 85 (June 20, 1925): 1352; "Status of Electric Refrigeration," ibid., 88 (October 30, 1926): 895-903; "Better and Lower-Priced Refrigerators Wait on Sales Volume," ibid., 89 (January 22, 1927): 187; "The Nation's Ice Bill," ibid., 90

(August 6, 1927): 249; "Refrigerators, Yes, But Who Owns Them," ibid., 106 (July 20, 1935): 21; "Time for Replacement," Electrical Merchandising, 65 (April 1941): 6-24.

20. "Cleared for Marketing Action," Electrical World 105 (May 25, 1935): 37-41; "Electrification" quoted from ibid., 37. Also see Loth, Swope, 179-181.

21. "Joke" quotation by John F. Gilchrist, vice president of Commonwealth Edison, Chicago, reported in "Appliance Distribution Methods a 'Joke,'" ibid., 82 (October 13, 1923): 777.

22. Electrical World surveyed one city of each population category. These reports are devoted to each city as follows: "Who Sells Electrical Appliances—A City of 500,000," Electrical World 82 (December 8, 1923): 1170; "II. A City of 200,000," ibid., 82 (December 22, 1923): 1271; "III. A City of 800,000," ibid., 83 (January 12, 1924): 92; "IV. A City of 250,000,'' ibid., 83 (February 2, 1924): 234; "V. A City of 800,000," ibid., 83 (March 1, 1924): 429; "VI. A City of 800,000 [city whose utility does not retail]," ibid., 83 (March 22, 1924): 573.

23. "Central-Station Appliance Sales," Electrical World 87 (January 2, 1926): 57. "If other dealers" quoted from [editorial], ibid., 87 (January 2, 1926): 1. Marshall E. Sampsell, vice president, National Electric Light Association, "Anti-Utility Legislation vs. Industry Co-operation," ibid., 98 (November 14, 1931): 870-871; Earl Whitehorne, "Oklahoma-Kansas Experience," ibid., 105 (February 16, 1935): 36-39.

24. Marshall E. Sampsell (vice president, National Electric Light Association), "Anti-Utility Merchandising Legislation vs. Industry Co-operation," Electrical World 98 (November 14, 1931): 870-871; "Department Store Sales Shown in Committee Report," ibid., 100 (December 23, 1932): 737.

25. Olney, Buy Now, Pay Later, table 2.1A, p. 10; table 2.6A, "Average Shares of Expenditure for Major Durable Goods, Current Price Estimates, 1869-1986," p. 34; table 4.2, "Outstanding Consumer Debt by Product Group, 1919-1939," pp. 93-94.

26. Automobile retail sales statistics from Gregory Chow, Demand for Automobiles in the United States (Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1957).

27. Technological developments enabling clear transmission and receipt of voice (as distinguished from nonvoice codes) made possible the radio boom of the 1920s; see Hugh G. J. Aitken, The Continuous Wave: Technology and American Radio, 1900-1932 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985). On the early history of broadcasting, see Susan J. Douglas, Inventing American Broadcasting, 1899-1922 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987); and Erik Barnouw, A Tower in Babel: A History of Broadcasting in the United States, vol. 1, to 1933 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1966). For Montgomery Ward's first radio, see Barnouw, A Tower of Babel, 1:186; on the creation of the National Broadcasting Company, ibid., 201; for the history of the Radio Act of 1927, ibid., 195-200, 215-217, 300-315. The importance of the plug-in radio for mass marketing is stressed by the trade journals; see "Make Radio Another Standard Household Electric Service," Electrical World 86 (September 12, 1925): 501, and "A New Trend in Radio," ibid., 86 (October 10, 1925): 734. The number of radio sets in use through 1925 is provided by "Estimated Total Radio Sets, 1922-1945," Television Factbook, no. 37 (Washington, D.C.: Television Digest, 1967), 52a. "The more impressive thought" quoted from "In Two Years Radio Runs Neck and Neck," Electrical World 85 (March 21, 1925): 600. Radio stock after 1925 determined by depreciating the annual sales of radios over a twelve-year life span. Residential saturation determined by dividing the stock of radios by the number of households in the United States and the number of electrified households. Source for radio sales is annual ten-year merchandising review in Electrical Merchandising, 1936 and later.

28. "It is impossible" quoted from "Points Way to Greater Domestic Loads," Electrical World 88 (November 27, 1926): 1126. For the peril of appliances, see Ernest B. Slade, ''Remove this Obstacle to Appliance Use [on nonstandardized plugs]," ibid., 82 (September 1923): 458-459; E. S. Lincoln, "An Engineer's Analysis of Why Some Appliances Are Not in Use," ibid., 82 (October 20, 1923): 807-809; L. R. Parker, "Development of Domestic Refrigerator," ibid., 81 (June 6, 1923): 1219-1222; "Interchangeable Appliance Plug Advances Interests of Entire Industry," ibid., 84 (October 18, 1924): 869; "Keeping Appliances at Work," ibid., 84 (November 8, 1924): 1008-1009; H. E. Young, "Servicing Domestic Electric Refrigerators," ibid., 84 (November 29, 1924): 1149-1152; "Electric Refrigerator Service Costs," ibid., 86 (July 4, 1925): 24; L. W. W. Morrow, "Action Urged on Standardization," ibid., 89 (May 21, 1927): 1057-1060; "An Industry Move to Stimulate Better Appliances," ibid., 93 (April 27, 1929): 835-836; "To Keep Appliances Working," ibid., 95 (January 18, 1930): 153. On retailer cooperation to remove unsafe appliances, see "Retailers Aiding Drive for Quality Appliances," ibid., 92 (October 20, 928): 773. On local ordinances against unsafe appliances, see Earl Whitehorne, "This Matter of Quality in Appliances," ibid., 101 (April 15, 1933): 488-489. On plug standardization, see Fred E. H. Schroeder, "More 'Small Things Forgotten': Domestic Electrical Plugs and Receptacles," Technology and Culture 27 (July 1986): 535-543. On difficulty of using appliances, see also C. E. Bose, Philip L. Bereano, and Mary Malloy, "Household Technology and the Social Construction of Housework," ibid., 25 (1984): 66.

29. Martha E. Dresslar, "Relative Cost of Gas and Electricity," Journal of Home Economics 15 (February 1923): 71-80; Ruth A. Potter and Martha E. Dresslar, "Further Data on the Cost of Gas and Electricity for Cooking," Journal of Home Economics 23 (January 1931): 67-70; Busch, "Cooking Competition," 222. On the competition of ice and mechanical refrigeration, see Anderson, Refrigeration, 215-221.

30. Margaret G. Reid, Economics of Household Production (New York: John Wiley, 1934), 97, 104-106; "Curling Irons and Bobbed Hair," Electrical World 93 (March 23, 1929): 575. Riverside Business Licenses, Riverside Police Department, ledgers for 1922 and 1926, Riverside Municipal Archives, University of California, Riverside, Rivera Library Special Collections. Hardening of local attitudes toward strangers at the door is seen in the mid-1930s: "Charities Irked by Hoboes Here," Riverside Daily Press, November 24, 1937, 7; "Bums Coming to City Will Labor," ibid., October 27, 1936, 4; Riverside County considered joining Los Angeles city's blockage in October 1936: "County's Supervisors Invited to Meeting on Barring Unemployed Transients from Southland," ibid., October 30, 1936, 4; "Riverside Housewives Asked Not to Give Any Help to Transients," ibid., March 6, 1934; "Kiwanians Back 'Bums Blockade,'" ibid., November 19, 1936, 4; "Residents Asked Not to Feed Transients," ibid., December 7, 1939, 4.

31. "Profound" quoted from Cowan, More Work for Mother, 174, and see also pp. 107-108. Cowan's argument was preceded by Heidi Irngard Hartmann's "Capitalism and Women's Work in the Home, 1900-1930," Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1974. Hartmann's thesis also influenced Julie Matthaei; see Julie A. Matthaei, An Economic History of Women in America: Women's Work, the Sexual Division of Labor, and the Development of Capitalism (New York: Schocken Books, 1982), 352 n. 1, 356 n. 3, 361 n. 5. See also Nye, Electrifying America, 272.

32. See introduction, table I.1.

33. Isabel Ely Lord, Getting Your Money's Worth: A Book on Expenditure (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1922), 48-49, 51, 80, 82. On the 1928 survey, see Ruth Lindquist, The Family in the Present Social Order: A Study of Needs of American Families (Chapel Hill:

University of North Carolina Press, 1931), 31-32, 150. Phyllis Palmer, Domesticity and Dirt: Housewives and Domestic Servants in the United States, 1920-1945 (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989), 9-10.

34. Wet-wash statistics from "The Real Appliance Sales Problem," Electrical World 88 (August 7, 1926): 258; and "Laundry-Tested," Business Week (August 18, 1934): 24. Gross receipts from table 3, "Rise in Annual Laundering Sales Volume," in Fred DeArmond, The Laundry Industry (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1950), 21. On black laundresses, see Geo. H. Watson, "Competition with Muscle,'' Electrical Merchandising 53 (March 1935): 9; and Palmer, Domesticity, 9-10; see also ibid., 9, for Palmer's analyses of the Bureau of Labor household survey. On the 1934 laundry campaign, see "Laundries Hit Back," Business Week (March 24, 1934): 12-13. Other statistics from Household Management and Kitchens, Reports of the Committees on Household Management, Effie I. Raitt, Chairman, and Kitchens and Other Work Centers, Abby L. Marlatt, Chairman, vol. 9, President's Conference on Home-building and Home Ownership, 1931, publications edited by John M. Gries and James Ford, General Editors (Washington, D.C.: President's Conference on Home Building and Home Ownership, printed by National Capital Press, 1932), 64; from data compiled by the Bureau of Home Economics, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Also see, table 16, "Percentage of Families Sending Laundry Out," in Reid, Economics, 97.

35. Ronald Tobey, Charles Wetherell, and Jay Brigham, "Moving Out and Settling In: Residential Mobility, Home Owning, and the Public Enframing of Citizenship, 1921-1950," American Historical Review 95 (December 1990): 1395-1422. Mildred Weigley Wood, Ruth Lindquist, and Lucy A. Studley, Managing the Home (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1932), 161.

36. Housing data from "New Housing Units Started, by Ownership, Type of Structure, Location, and Construction Cost: 1889-1970," in Series N 162, "Urban Areas, New Housing Units Started [1,000s]," Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970, 2 vols., Bicentennial edition (Washington, D.C., 1975), 2: 639-640. Pearson correlations between appliance growth rates and households growth rate, 1921-1941: vacuum cleaner r = .32; range r = .43; refrigerator r = .45; heating pad r = .52; washing machine r = .06; flatiron r = .14.

37. Normalized rate is defined as absolute annual sales of the appliance per hundred households living in dwellings capable of servicing the appliance.

38. "Some six or seven" quoted from "Why Appliances Do Not Sell More Rapidly, An Answer in Present Housewiring Incompleteness," Electrical Merchandising 35 (March 1926): 6133. "Electrical articles" quoted from "Why Appliances Do Not Sell More Rapidly [editorial]," ibid. See the confusion in Nye, Electrifying America, 262, 265.

39. "Residential wiring" quoted from E. S. Fitz, "Residential Load Possibilities," Electrical World 102 (September 23, 1933): 400.

40. Not distinguishing between electrification and electrical modernization are Cowan, More Work for Mother, 151-191; Alice Kessler-Harris, Women Have Always Worked: A Historical Overview (Old Westbury, N.Y.: Feminist Press, 1981), 40, 52; Nye, Electrifying America, 238-286; Platt, The Electric City, 235-267; Michael Doucet and John Weaver, Housing the North American City (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1991), 423-445; and Witold Rybczynski, Home: A Short History of an Idea, repr. (New York: Penguin Books, 1987), 150-154. Hints about physical quality of housing are not followed up in Cowan, More Work for Mother, 155, 162, 173, 182-183; Nye, Electrifying America, 17, 266, 275; or Platt, The Electric City, 241.

41. Bakersfield, California, Ordinance no. 154, New Series, An Ordinance Creating a Department to Be Known as the 'Department of Electricity,' Providing for the Greater Safety to Life and Property by Regulating the Installation, Repair, Operation, and Maintenance of all Electrical Conductors [etc.], January 2, 1923, articles 2b, 11; Pasadena, California, Ordinance no. 1969, An Ordinance of the City of Pasadena Fixing the Duties and Powers of the City Electrician; Regulating the Installation, Alteration and Repair of Inside and Outside Electrical Construction, and Providing for the Inspection of Same, March 28, 1922, articles 9, 15. The National Board of Fire Underwriters' model building code stipulated that building codes require electrical installations to meet the National Electrical Code; see [National Board of Fire Underwriters] Building Code Recommended by the National Board of Fire Underwriters, 4th ed. (New York: [National Board of Fire Underwriters], 1922), sec. 261.

42. History of the National Electrical Code from Terrell Croft, Wiring for Light and Power: A Detailed and Fully Illustrated Commentary on the National Electrical Code, 4th ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1924), preface to the 1923 National Electrical Code, x; see also Charles S. Morgan, Public Advocate for Fire Safety: The Story of the National Fire Protection Association (New York: Newcomen Society in North America, 1977); branch circuiting comparison of 1920 and 1923 codes refers to circuits of no. 14 conducting wire, Croft, Wiring for Light and Power, 201-202. The code stipulated no. 18 wire for lamps, no. 14 wire for small motor appliances, and no. 12 wire for large-base lamps ("mogul" base lamps) on two-wire circuits; ibid., 200-202. Chicago's 1923 code revisions referenced, ibid., 375-376. On separate appliance circuits, also see H. C. Cushing, Jr., Standard Wiring for Electric Light and Power, as Adopted by the Fire Underwriters of the United States, 31st ed. (New York: H. C. Cushing, Jr., 1925), 239, 246. Popularization of the National Electrical Code was provided by Blanche Halbert, ed., The Better Homes Manual, published in cooperation with Better Homes in America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1931), 287-309.

43. For heavy heating appliances, see Halbert, Better Homes Manual, 395-397. See also Cushing, Standard Wiring, 136, 161-168.

44. "It is very difficult" quoted from Terrell Croft, Wiring of Finished Buildings, a practical treatise ... (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1915), 102; see also pp. 61-63, 101-143, and the discussion, "Neatness and How Obtained," 157-159. See also Arthur L. Cook, Electric Wiring for Lighting and Power Installations (New York: John Wiley, [1917] 1933), 177-223.

45. My conclusion that inadequate wiring divided the nation's housing stock into classes of technological capability is supported by the following references: W. J. Canada (Electrical Field Secretary, National Fire Protection Association), "Wiring Code National Standardization," Electrical World 85 (June 27, 1925): 1424-1425, which argued for replacement of local building codes on wiring by a national standard. The "Red Seal" plan originated in 1924 in an effort to induce the home building industry, utilities, and electrical manufacturers to raise wiring standards. How the industry intended the plan to work is discussed in "California Electrical Men Organize Behind the Red Seal Plan" [subtitle: "Adequate Wiring the Basic Need in All Market Development Work"], Electrical Merchandising 34 (October 1925): 5619-5620. M. Luckiesh, "40,000,000 Outlets in Prospect,'' Electrical World 86 (October 24, 1925), 851-852. M. Luckiesh (Director of the Lighting Research Laboratory, Nela Park [National Electric Light Association research facility], "Good Business in Fixtures," ibid., 86 (November 14, 1925): 995-996, which cites a national NELA survey that found 23 percent of all lightbulbs

unshaded and 31 percent of all fixtures "obsolete." "Why Appliances Do Not Sell More Rapidly: An Answer in Present Housewiring Incompleteness," Electrical Merchandising 35 (March 1926): 6133. ''Convenience Outlets and Residential Electrification," Electrical World 89 (April 30, 1927): 898. Earl A. Graham, "Home Lighting—an Unsaturated Market," ibid., 98 (September 12, 1931): 464-466, which estimated that 70 percent of electrified dwellings did not have lights at "the level considered at present to be minimum good practice" (p. 464). "What Is Adequate House Wiring?" ibid., 100 (October 29, 1932): 603-605, stated, matter-of-factly, that "inadequate wiring for residences has long been a stumbling block to complete home electrification." E. S. Ritz, "Residential Load Possibilities," ibid., 102 (September 23,1933): 400. "Facing the Facts on the American Home [editorial]," ibid., 104 (July 28, 1934): 102, interprets the Real Property Inventory of 1934 as showing that the American urban housing stock on average was substandard. Laurence Wray, "How to Make Money in Lighting," Electrical Merchandising 62 (November 1939): 1-5, reports a Women's Home Companion survey of wiring and lighting upgrade needed in 1,000 homes, as part of a national "Better Lighting" campaign. Irving W. Clark (Manager, Home Building Division, Westinghouse Electric Appliance Division), "Electrifying Postwar Housing," Electrical Merchandising 69 (June 1943): 20, 59, argued that utilities should join manufacturers in obtaining new wiring standards for the expected postwar building boom. Michael Doucet and John Weaver do not distinguish between electrification and electrical modernization. I have been unable to relate their impressive data to the categorization of housing grades in this chapter. They utilize the number of rooms per resident and assessed valuation as measures of the quality of housing, supplemented by national censuses on sanitation facilities in homes. See Doucet and Weaver, Housing the North American City, 423-445. Doucet and Weaver mention the deterioration of housing after the onset of the depression in 1930 and attempt to measure it. They find that the passage of better owned houses into rentals increased the availability of better rental units (but see pp. 428, 457-462).