Is Andrew Carnegie a villain or a hero PDF

Preview

Summary

Term paper on Andrew Carnegie analyzing his rise in wealth and the impact it had on society...

Description

1

America in the Late 19th Century: Don’t Judge a Nation or an Industrialist by its Cover

U.S. History II Heather Richardson April 17, 2019

2 The late 19th century in America was an era of inconsistencies. Following the Reconstruction era, it was a time when the American economy grew rapidly. Industrialization expanded, giving the United States a façade of progressivism, while the growth masked many serious social issues. As big businesses and the labor economy grew, so did economic inequality, wealth becoming highly concentrated at the top. Looking to the top, one leader in industrialization stands out in particular as a symbol for the contradictory state of America at the time– Andrew Carnegie. Carnegie was a leader of the steel century in the late 19th century, and played a huge role in the industrialization of America. One of the wealthiest men to ever live, Carnegie was certainly well-known for his success and power. However, like the United States during his era, Carnegie was also a man of many contradictions. His accomplishments had many positive societal impacts, yet some of his actions along the road to success had adverse effects. Therefore, Carnegie was a very complicated figure. Mixed opinions of the robber baron derived from aspects of his upbringing, his business practices, his philanthropy, and his writings. Born in Scotland in 1835, Andrew Carnegie was a man who came from very little.1 His father was a weaver, but he was educated and politically minded, and he loved to read. As factories began to take the place of weavers and other craftsmen including his father, Carnegie saw what poverty really meant, watching his family go into economic depression in the 1840’s.2 In 1848, the Carnegies emigrated to the United States for greater opportunities. Settling in Pittsburgh, Carnegie began work as a bobbin boy in a cotton mill and then as a messenger boy in a telegraph office, but he had much bigger dreams. His ambition can be seen early on in the way 1 The labor world. (Duluth, Minn.), 25 Jan. 1902. Chronicling America: Historic American Newspapers. Lib. of Congress. 2 Andrew Carnegie: Rags to Riches, Power to Peace. Directed by Vicky Matthews. Performed by Brian Cox. United Kindom, 2015. DVD.

3 he desired to read in a free local library, although he was once denied because he was not employed in a mill, factory, or workshop. Even as a young, poor boy, Carnegie took this rejection as an opportunity to instigate change by writing about this injustice and lack of resources available to lowerclassmen in an article he titled “Working Boy.”3 This event would foreshadow his many donations to public libraries after he created his fortune. Through the railways, Carnegie got into iron manufacturing, and later into steel. He benefitted from the Civil War, as the railroads he helped build were essential to transporting troops, weaponry and other war necessities. The manufacturing done in Pittsburgh essentially helped the North win the Civil War.4 After the war, much of the infrastructure was destroyed, and there was greater need for steel for rebuilding. Carnegie, along with his charm and fearlessness, was in the right place at this time and was focused on continuing to invest and expand. He used innovative business methods, such as vertical integration, that led him to great success and to domination of the steel market.5 For a boy with such a humble upbringing, Carnegie was becoming richer than he could have imagined. In a letter that Carnegie wrote to himself when he was 33, he seems to remember his upbringing and duty to help others who struggle like he did, writing, “I propose to take an income no greater than 50,000 per annum, …but spend the surplus each year for benevolent purpose. The more I am the more I can give away. Let us cast aside business forever, except for others.”6 This note shows Carnegie’s commitment to helping the common man go from rags to riches as he did. However, it also exemplifies how the American dream was not as easily obtained as the U.S. outwardly portrayed. The large economic divide at the time did not allow 3 The labor world. (Duluth, Minn.), 25 Jan. 1902. 4 Andrew Carnegie: Rags to Riches, Power to Peace. 5 Heather Richardson, “The Rise of Big Businesses” (class lecture, U.S. History II, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, January 28, 2019). 6 Andrew Carnegie: Rags to Riches, Power to Peace.

4 much room for growth within industries, making Carnegie a symbol of self-made prosperity that few would achieve. Once he became a success, Carnegie was stood out amongst the other leaders in his industry for intentionally seeking to create millionaires out of those who worked for and with him. For example, he made Col. Scott, Carnegie’s boss back in the telegraph office and one who helped him in so many ways, a partner in the steel business and made him one of the earliest millionaires in the steel business.7 By 1889, Carnegie was focused on dividing up power within his organization “to make others work while (he) thinks.”8 This mindset reflects his belief that the wealthy should be the trustees of the poor.9 He did this by employing 33 partners, like he did Col. Scott, and pushing them with hard work and great responsibility, but also greatly rewarding them. When one of these men could not keep up with the pressure, Carnegie would bring in “a new eager, striving, ruthless young man to take his place.”10 He wanted to share his wealth, but he recognized that the only way to acquire that wealth was by having the hardest workers producing the best results. This would lead him to enforcing some harsh business practices. Although Carnegie was seemingly dedicated himself to the betterment of others, he was a business man and profit was important to him. His business practices were unique and contained many discrepancies from his outward appearance as a man of the people. When one of Carnegie’s workers was interviewed for McClure’s Magazine, the worker revealed the disturbing truth about the factory conditions, exclaiming, “Hard! I guess it's hard. I lost forty pounds the

7 The evening world. (New York, N.Y.), 12 Aug. 1919. Chronicling America: Historic American Newspapers. Lib. of Congress. 8 The evening world. (New York, N.Y.), 12 Aug. 1919. 9 Carnegie, Andrew, 1835-1919. The Gospel of Wealth, and Other Timely Essays. Garden City, N. Y. :Doubleday, Doran & company, inc., 1933. 10 The evening world. (New York, N.Y.), 12 Aug. 1919.

5 first three months I came into this business. It sweats the life out of a man.”11 Not only was the work strenuous and dangerous, but the workers were paid extremely little. The majority of his workers were paid $1.40 an hour, working 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, with only one day off on Independence Day off.12 These wages and conditions were the antithesis of the “Progressive Era” which cultivated economic prosperity and increasing wages.13 During the late19th century, the growth of the labor force came with a rise of labor unions. These unions were positive in giving the workers a voice, and allotting them power under the business tycoons. However, controversy in steel industry labor grew as people like Carnegie rejected the union campaign, which wanted to organize the 500,000 steel workers. Instead, the steel industry allowed for collective bargaining, which was said to have been employed throughout the industry. However, workers disagreed and argued that collective bargaining involved working together between two parties, rather than the current method in which all decisions ended with one powerful person.14 This would bring into question the idea of civil liberties, which included the rights to freedom of speech and assemblage, during a time when making “the world safe for democracy”15 stressed liberty and compassion. Carnegie was one of the leaders who strongly opposed labor unions, and the events that occurred at his labor mill in Homestead in July of 1892 show just how opposed he was to giving workers that privilege.16 Different from other mill towns, Homestead was founded with the idea 11 Hamlin Garland, McClure's Magazine. Vol. 3. Homestead and Its Perilous Trades. S.S. McClure, June 1894. 12 Hamlin Garland, McClure's Magazine. Vol. 3. Homestead and Its Perilous Trades. 13 "The Progressive Era." The Progressive Era (1890 - 1920). Accessed April 17, 2019. 14 LOUIS STARK. "STEEL AND THE UNIONS JOIN THE ISSUE." New York Times (1923Current File), Jul 05, 1936. 15 Woodrow Wilson, War Messages, 65th Cong., 1st Sess. Senate Doc. No. 5, Serial No. 7264, Washington, D.C., 1917; pp. 3-8, passim. 16 Burgoyne, Arthur Gordon, -1914. Homestead. A complete history of the struggle of July, 1892, between the Carnegie steel company, limited, and the Amalgamated association of iron and steel workers. 1893. Retrieved from the Digital Public Library of America ,

6 of being a worker’s republic with a highly organized labor force. These workers were given great freedom and responsibility, but they were paid on the basis of a “sliding scale” that would increase worker’s hours and lower wages by linking them to the fluctuation of the steel market. Workers believed this devalued their work and went against justice and republican virtue. Carnegie, however, believed that how much they earn should be tied to how much the company earns. 17 The workers were not happy. Not only were they not happy with the low wages, but also with the poor working conditions and mistreatment, so his steel workers went on strike in the summer of 1892. Carnegie brought in Henry Frick, another industrialist known for his handling of labor unions, to help control the uprising. They shut down the mill in hopes that the workers would give in, but it only created greater uproar. July 6, 1892 was the battle between strikers and 300 security guards, leading to the deaths of 9 men and 40 injured.18 The guards hired to monitor this strike were the “Pinkerton” guards who were known for their successful protection of property during labor conflicts, but were also known for their tendency towards fatal violence. In his testimony, Henry Frick claimed to not know the Pinkerton’s were armed, but their history had to have led him to believe otherwise, or at least that they were violent.19 A few years earlier in 1890, these guards used their rifles to kill five people in a strike at the New York Central Railroad.20 This tragic event represents how while there were fewer riots and racial crimes at the time, acts of violence were still occurring to show dominance. Furthermore, the reality of Carnegie’s factory conditions and wages that led to this violence 17 KRAUSE, PAUL. "Andrew Carnegie: Robber Baron and Philanthropist." In The Battle For Homestead, 1880-1892: Politics, Culture, and Steel, 227-39. PITTSBURGH; LONDON: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1992. 18 Oates, William C., George Ticknor Curtis, and T. V. Powderly. "The Homestead Strike." The North American Review 155, no. 430 (1892): 355-75. 19 United States Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, excerpt from “Investigation of the employment of Pinkerton detectives in connection with the labor troubles at Homestead, Pa,” Digital Public Library of America. 20 Burgoyne, Arthur Gordon, -1914. Homestead.

7 elucidates how the American economy, which held the façade of great labor force and wage growth, was not in fact as progressive as it appeared. Aside from his upbringing and business practices, Carnegie’s writings and actions are contradictory in many ways. In Carnegie’s Gospel of Wealth, he outlines how great inequality in inevitable. However, he goes on to state how the intelligent men that rise to wealth have a duty to “set an example of modest unostentatious living, … to provide moderately for the legitimate wants of those dependent upon him, … then to consider all surplus revenues which come to him simply as trust funds … to produce the most beneficial results for the community.”21 Carnegie certainly succeeds in putting his excess earnings towards to greater goof through his philanthropy, donating over $350 million in his lifetime.22 At the same time, Carnegie used his wealth to indulge in personal luxuries, such as his buying Skibo Castle in Scotland which was filled with books and treasure – a colossal public display of his wealth.i Nevertheless, Carnegie is different from the other robber barons because he recognizes that his fortune didn’t come from his work alone; his fortune came from the people at every level that contributed to his success. Because of this realization, he not only gives back what he earns to the community, but tells the other fortunate men to do so through his Gospel of Wealth. In an interview with Carnegie’s granddaughter, she discusses another aspect that sets Carnegie apart: “if he gave, you also had to give.” She uses the example of a library donation, explaining that one would either have to buy the books or the land for the library, so that the people would have an invested interest in that project which they worked for.23 He was not only a philanthropist but smart philanthropist that invested in the future. 21 Carnegie, Andrew, 1835-1919. The Gospel of Wealth, and Other Timely Essays. Garden City, N. Y. :Doubleday, Doran & company, inc., 1933. 22 "Andrew Carnegie's Story." Carnegie Corporation of New York. Accessed April 1, 2019. 23 Andrew Carnegie: Rags to Riches, Power to Peace.

8 Although Carnegie genuinely believed in philanthropy and providing resources for the common people which they may not have, he also was not humble in naming rights. Along with many universities, research centers, music halls, and more, he donated 1,917 libraries, most of which bore his name. He even went so far as to purchase and name a species of dinosaur after himself, when his team helped discover a long neck dinosaur in 1899.24 He placed this excavated beast in his museum in Pittsburgh and called it the Diplodocus Carnegii.25 Discovered through digging below Earth’s surface, this archeological symbol of modernization represents the importance of mining to the growth of the nation in the 19th century. This scientific contribution and the generously donated public places were the industrialists, like Carnegie’s, footprint on our culture.26 This goes to show how Carnegie wanted to portray himself as a righteous man of wealth, supporting and helping elevate and educate the men below him. However, looking at the mistreatment of his workers, one can see that conflicts lie beneath his philanthropic actions. Furthermore, people believed his philanthropic actions, such as donating a library, did not help fix the real problems at hand, such as poor working conditions in steel factories.27 Propaganda, such as newspaper cartoons were used to elevate his gifts by exemplifying how they could be used as tools for becoming like Carnegie. In a cartoon titled, “Rags to Riches”ii from the Washington Post, we see Carnegie standing with a bag of his riches, telling children in a classroom, “You are doing higher things than grabbing dollars.” This was meant to convey the importance of an education, which could be aided by the Carnegie’s libraries and education institutions.28 This was also used as a symbol for the American people that they too can go from 24 (New York journal and advertiser. [New York N.Y] (New York, NY), Dec. 11 1898.) 25 (Rea, Tom. Bone Wars: The Excavation and Celebrity of Andrew Carnegies Dinosaur. Pittsburgh, Pa: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2004.) 26 Hughes, Robert J. "They Worked Hard for the Money." Wall Street Journal (1923 - Current File), Aug 31, 2001. 27 KRAUSE, PAUL. "Andrew Carnegie: Robber Baron and Philanthropist." 28 In the Limelight; 3/29/1905; Records of the U.S. Senate, Record Group 46.

9 nothing to wealth if they work hard. Unfortunately, people like immediate fixes, not long term remedies, so opinions on Carnegie’s benevolence may not have been exactly what he hoped for. People acknowledged Carnegie’s charity, yet some believed that it was not creating enough change. A newspaper article titled “Why Giving Back Isn’t Enough,” notes how Carnegie’s philanthropy may have helped ease some social anxiety that came from inequality in the free market system, but his efforts were not lasting. What one gives back has to work towards justice in the long run, bringing about systematic change rather than a temporary alleviation of pain. “Philanthropy should go after inequality’s causes, not just its effects.”29 This suggests that Carnegie, a source of the inequality himself, was helping the small picture, rather than the big picture. Giving certainly did not cancel out his more controversial actions and deem Carnegie a “good guy.” Along with his writings on what one should do with wealth, Carnegie’s words and actions are also incongruous in his on stance peace. In 1901, He sells his steel industry to JP Morgan, and turns his focus to the abolition of war.30 He calls for world peace, while at the same time, he secures the largest contract with the US navy in history. He makes iron and steel to build up the navy.31 This contradicts his opposition to war and belief that man should not resort to killing each other. He was obviously an intelligent man and knew what he was creating with the navy, so why would he do it? He does, however, call for an international code of arbitration – the Great Peace Fund. In his call for the creation of this fund, he argues, “the crime of war is inherent, since it decides not in favor of the right, but always of the strong.”32 Fortunately, his power allowed him 29 Walker, Darren. "Why Giving Back Isn't enough." New York Times (1923-Current File), Dec 18, 2015. 30 "Andrew Carnegie's Story." Carnegie Corporation of New York. Accessed April 1, 2019. 31 Andrew Carnegie: Rags to Riches, Power to Peace. 32 "Andrew Carnegie's Announcement of His Great Peace Fund." The Advocate of Peace (18941920) 73, no. 1 (1911): 7-8.

10 opportunities of meeting with other powerful men around the world to communicate his proposal for peace. Regardless, his words and contradicting actions symbolize the way in which much of what America promoted at the time did not align with what actually went on within our nation. While Andrew Carnegie serves as a symbol for the deceiving state of America over a hundred years ago, many lessons can still be learned from his contradictions that apply today. Much like the late 19th century, the United States is nonetheless filled with inconsistencies. We are known as a country in which people can come to fulfill the American dream, yet our government makes it extremely difficult for immigrants to cross our borders. We have many governmental programs that are designed to spread the wealth, yet, like the industrialists during Carnegie’s time, much of our wealth is concentrated at the top in what we today call the “1%.” These are just a few of the many issues in our nation, but they serve as examples of an important lesson that can be learned from Carnegie and the governmental system: things are not always as they seem. One can weigh the pros and cons of Carnegie’s actions and determine whether he or she believes the robber baron to be a hero or a villain. However, one cannot argue that Carnegie was a man whose word always aligned with his actions. For this reason, we can compare Carnegie, one of the greatest powers of the late 19th century, to the state United States during his lifetime. His ambiguities and inconsistencies capture the late 19th century and remind us to look beyond what meets the eye.

11

i

ii...