On the workers' side the weak points were “With me as the secret owner, I could “persuade” the business managers to keep their prices low, giving me the a tremendous business advantage.” This shows that Rockefeller would take advantage of people. “I was intensely competitive, and used intimidation to put my competitors out of business.” The strongest viewpoint was “I’m also very sorry about the coal miners who were shot by the company guards. I owned the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company, but my managers there are the ones who made a mess of that situation. I wouldn’t have let the situation get that dangerous.” He partly took the fault for the incident he didn’t expect that to happen. The industrialists weakest point is “Mr. Carnegie, well I know he uses that money now to do good, giving it away and all, but back in the day he knew what conditions were like in those steel mills, he let it continue.” One of the conditions in the steel mills was “Coal dust hanging in the lungs caused the lifelong disease "black lung." So basically Carnegie knew this was going on but didn’t care. …show more content…
The major arguments for the prosecution side is how the industrialists treated the workers horrible. For example, “We asked to work no more than 10 hours a day instead of the 12-14 hours that we were working.” So basically the workers wanted to work 10 hours but instead received extra hours. “The hardest work was dynamited and hammering the hard granite Sierra mountains and building tunnels through them.” This shows that the places the workers worked on were very dangerous and not
Andrew Carnegie, the monopolist of the steel industry, was one of the worst of the Robber Barons. Like the others, he was full of contradictions and tried to bring peace to the world, but only caused conflicts and took away the jobs of many factory workers. Carnegie Steel, his company, was a main supplier of steel to the railroad industry. Working together, Carnegie and Vanderbilt had created an industrial machine so powerful, that nothing stood in its path. This is much similar to how Microsoft has monopolized the computer software
During the late 1800's and early 1900's, change in American society was very evident in the economy. An extraordinary expansion of the industrial economy was taking place, presenting new forms of business organization and bringing trusts and holding companies into the national picture. The turn of the century is known as the "Great Merger Movement:" over two thousand corporations were "swallowed up" by one hundred and fifty giant holding companies.1 This powerful change in industry brought about controversy and was a source of social anxiety. How were people to deal with this great movement and understand the reasons behind the new advancements? Through the use of propaganda, the public was enlightened and the trusts were attacked. Muckraking, a term categorizing this type of journalism, began in 1903 and lasted until 1912. It uncovered the dirt of trusts and accurately voiced the public's alarm of this new form of industrial control. Ida Tarbell, a known muckraker, spearheaded this popular investigative movement.2 As a journalist, she produced one of the most detailed examinations of a monopolistic trust, The Standard Oil Company.3 Taking on a difficult responsibility and using her unique journalistic skills, Ida Tarbell was able to get to the bottom of a scheme that allowed the oil industry to be manipulated by a single man, John D. Rockefeller.
Matthew Josephson agreed that Rockefeller was indeed a "robber baron". In the book Taking Sides, he claims that Rockefeller was a deceptive and conspiratorial businessman, whose fortune was built by secret agreements and wrung concessions from America's leading railroad companies (Taking Sides 25). When John D. Rockefeller merged with the railroad companies, he had gained control of a strategic transportation route that no other companies would be able to use. Rockefeller would then be able to force the hand on the railroads and was granted a rebate on his shipments of oil. This was a kind of secret agreement between the two industries.
All levels of protection for the miners failed them. Every agency that was entrusted with their safety had other concerns as priority. Mr. Scanlan submitted true and honest reports of violations over a long period of time but never went that extra step to enforce the law. State authorities should have acted when the initial reports were made. The Union membership was at risk and yet the Union never represented Local 52 nor gave it support when it tried on its own to get state assistance with their grievances. Politics and profit motivated elected officials appointees and the coal company.
The Cleveland massacre was the beginning of Rockefeller’s career and an end to many of the small oil refineries in Cleveland, Ohio. Frank Tarbell was one of those people. For 2 years, Tarbell searched for illegal activities that Rockefeller had committed and one of the major ways that Tarbell gained information from was interviewing businessmen and even senior officers of Standard Oil. At first, only a small amount of businessmen would talk because they were afraid of Rockefeller and his massive company. One man had even told Tarbell that Rockefeller was going to destroy McClure’s Magazine if she kept investigating Standard Oil (Ida Tarbell, 1857-1944: She Used Her Reporting Skills Against One of the Most Powerful Companies in the World). Soon she found evidence of the illegal methods that Rockefeller used to take over the oil industry. After she wrote an article about the illegal methods, many people began assisting her in exposing Standard Oil. With the help of Mark Twain, Tarbell was able to interview the most powerful senior executive of Standard Oil, Henry H. Rogers. During this interview with Henry H. Rogers, who was surprisingly open, Tarbell confirmed the information that she learned from other businessmen and published it in McClure’s Magazine. For over the next two years, Rogers and Tarbell held long interviews regularly and Tarbell was
Let us first look at Mr. Andrew Carnegie. Carnegie was a mogul in the steel industry. Carnegie developed a system known as the vertical integration. This method basically cut out the ‘middle man’. Carnegie bought his own iron and coal mines (which were necessities in producing steel) because purchasing these materials from independent companies cost too much and was insufficient for Carnegie’s empire. This hurt his competitors because they still had to pay for raw materials at much higher prices. Unlike Carnegie, John D. Rockefeller integrated his oil business from top to bottom. Rockefeller’s system was considered a ‘horizontal’ integration. This meant that he followed one product through all phases of the production process, i.e. Rockefeller had control over the oil from the moment it was drilled to the moment it was sold to the consu...
James B. Weaver illustrates the true damage of monopolies on the public in “A Call to Action” (Document 4). Weaver, a two-time candidate for president of the United States, addresses the meticulous tactics which trusts and monopolies use to increase their profit at the expense of the public and asserts that their main weapons are, ”threats, intimidation, bribery, fraud, wreck, and pillage.” Arguments such as Weaver’s, suggest and end to the end of the laissez-faire capitalism that monopolies are sustained upon. Laissez-faire capitalism is essentially a system where the government takes no position in the affairs of businesses and does not interfere, no matter what harm is being done. This ideology dominated the business world of the century and allowed for vast unemployment, low wages, and impoverishment. Soon, laborers also begin to express their dismay with the way that such businesses are run and the treatment of workers in the railroad industry. An instance of this being the Pullman Strike of 1894. In 1894, laborers went on a nationwide strike against the Pullman Company; they issued a statement regarding their strike in June (Document 6). Workers are repulsed by Pullman’s exertion of power over several institutions and how his greed affects his competitors, who must reduce their wages to keep up with his businesses. This incident inspires many to take
Speaking of where that money, in document #10 we see a small cartoon post from The Saturday Globe, Utica, New York, July 9, 1892. At the bottom it conveys, “Forty Millionaire Carnegie in his Great Double Role” With this message, it displays Carnegie both giving away a Library to Pittsburgh and money to Scotland, and cutting wages from workers. This drawing signifies what he does with the money rather than paying his workers with that money. Looking at wages in document #7 helps to see how much a worker are paid in a chart, even though iron and steel workers look like they have decent wages(daily hrs. 10.67, daily wages 1.81), it was to many unfair wages. Compare this to Carnegie’s daily “wage” was ninety two grand! Confirming wages are unfair.
To describe John D. Rockefeller in one word would be an extremely difficult, if not impossible thing to do. Rockefeller was known by so many things in his time and still today; a captain of industry who revolutionised the American economy with new business practices and keen management of what he controlled, a robber baron who lied and cheated his way to the top with back room dealings and taking advantage of the most disadvantaged of people. In his early life, Rockefeller grew up in Richmond, New York with his two brothers and two sisters about 20 years before the start of the Civil War as the child of Eliza Davison and William Avery Rockefeller. His father was con artist who spent most of John’s life traveling selling his various elixirs and his mother was a devout Baptist who John said shaped his life and most of his religious views for the rest of his life. Towards the end of his life, Rockefeller had built up a beyond substantial fortune but, seeing as how he was now retired from the oil industry and had no desire to invest into a new business, he decided to follow Andrew Carnegie's Gospel of Wealth by donating the bulk of his wealth to charity. John D. Rockefeller was truly a man who was almost undefinable despite the simple black and white labels that most people and historians have pinned upon him, as we examine his life it can be determined that Rockefeller was neither an evil man nor a good one but someone who lived his life in the grey.
...interpretations of their assumption of millions of dollars. Due to their appropriation of godlike fortunes, and numerous contributions to American society, they simultaneously displayed qualities of both aforementioned labels. Therefore, whether it be Vanderbilt’s greed, Rockefeller’s philanthropy, or Carnegie’s social Darwinist world view, such men were, quite unarguably, concurrently forces of immense good and evil: building up the modern American economy, through monopolistic trusts and exploitative measures, all the while developing unprecedented affluence. Simply, the captains of late 19th century industry were neither wholly “robber barons” or “industrial statesmen”, but rather both, as they proved to be indifferent to their “lesser man” in their quests for profit, while also helping to organize industry and ultimately, greatly improve modern American society.
The industrialists, or robber barons, provided workers with low wages, long work hours, and unsafe working conditions. Andrew Carnegie, a wealthy steel manufacturer, provided horrible conditions for his workers. With dropping steel prices, Henry C. Frick, the manager of the homestead steel plant, wanted to drastically cut wages; have laborers work a twelve-hour day, six days a week; and destroy the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers Union. Carnegie supported Frick’s views, which no Captain of Industry, or someone concerned with “moving forward”, not just growing their wealth, would have agreed with. Due to the poor conditions given to Carnegie’s workers, they went on the Homestead Plant workers strike. The workers ultimately lost and poor working conditions were still in play. Some could argue that Frick was the one being unfair towards workers, not Carnegie; however, Carnegie hired Frick to be the manager of the steel plant and he agreed with his views. The businessmen were against unions, fair wages, and improved worker conditions. The industrials of the 1900s were robber barons that only cared if their workers were working to make them
With all his businesses, investments, and accomplishments, Carnegie still struggle with some of his partners and managers, especially after his brother Tom dies. He hires Henry C. Frick and names him chairman in 1889, pleased with his choice as Frick increases profits from $2 million to $5.4 million by 1890. However, times become difficult during a four-year depression and strike, damaging Carnegie’s reputation. He comes to lose trust in Frick, and their relationship suffers as they disagree on managerial issues. Frick resigns and Carnegie forces other partners out to cut cost and labor. He monopolizes the industry, making a deal with John D. Rockefeller to purchase his iron ore, keeping him from becoming competition in the steel industry. At 63 years old, Andrew Carnegie is approached to sell Carnegie Steel to an unknown buyer, whom Frick vouches for. However, because he is suspicious of Frisk, he seeks out the mystery buyer. After revealing Frisk’s dishonesty, Carnegie eliminates him from the buyout deal, causing a year-long conflict. That conflict results in Frick taking a loss and Carnegie taking control of both Carnegie Steel and Frisk Coke, worth $320 million in capital. The Carnegie company is later sold
“Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life! I have given you my soul, leave me my name!” (1333), laments John Proctor at the climax of the classic drama, The Crucible, as written by New York playwright, Arthur Miller, and inspired by true events. Set in the year 1692, in Salem, Massachusetts, John Proctor, a near-middle-aged, working farmer, is among the many people in the (at the time) small town that are accused of witchcraft after rumors are spread by Abigail Williams, the cunning antagonist of the story. After a lengthy trial, John Proctor refuses to have a paper of proof signed by him be displayed on the town’s church door, stating that he would rather die than commit to a crime which is, in fact, false. This seemed
Document D resentfully emphasizes the alleged capacity of the corrupt industrialists. In the picture illustrated, panic-stricken people pay acknowledgment to the lordly tycoons. Correlating to this political cartoon, in 1900, Carnegie was willing to sell his holdings of his company. During the time Morgan was manufacturing steel pipe tubing, Carnegie threatened to ruin him by invading his business if Morgan did not buy Carnegie out. E... ...
In this passage, the audience truly sees the meaning behind Herbert Kohl's message. His purpose for writing comes back to the fact that people interpret situations differently in every way. Kohl not only wanted to highlight the purpose behind wanting to learn something new but he also wanted readers to be aware that most time it does not come down to the inability of someone who doesn't want to learn but the real reason behind why they don't want to. People have different opinions on topics such as these but Kohl wanted to show that being able to want to stand up for your culture and the meanings behind it are rather important. Behind Kohl's purpose for writing, we see an insight into his past life relating to Wilfredo's. Kohl's reason for