Robber Baron Document Rankings

Power Rank 1:  Document Number: 10

Why do you believe it best represents the era you have been studying?.
Document 10 best represents the era because it states the ideal result of the increase in industry and the actual result.  The document describes the ideal world of the wealth spreading and eliminating poverty and the world it created, which was one where the poor were worse off than before.

Power Rank 2:  Document Number: 9

Why do you believe it best represents the era you have been studying?
Document 9 is an interview with William Vanderbilt in October 1882 and shows Vanderbilt discussing how little the public matter to him.  Therefore this document confirms the suspicion that robber barons, such as Vanderbilt, cared very little for the public and this shows the relationship because robber barons and the common people.

Power Rank 3:  Document Number: 7

Why do you believe it best represents the era you have been studying?
Document 7, a government report on trusts and the combinations of industry, features a section about what trusts really did, according to Rockefeller.  This document shows the relationship between the government and robber barons, what they said (whether or not they meant it) actually ended up in government reports, proving that they had control of the government in the era.

Power Rank 4:  Document Number: 12

Why do you believe it best represents the era you have been studying?
Document 12 was created in 1871 and states the ideas for reforming the economic system that existed at that time.  This represents the movements that were underway during the era and created unrest among the American people that would lead to new laws.

Power Rank 5:  Document Number: 16

Why do you believe it best represents the era you have been studying?
Document 16 states the beliefs of many robber barons that allowed them to justify their actions.  Of course this theory was not popular among the poor, which just shows another difference between the two groups in that era.

Age of Railroads

1. What problems did employees of the railroad companies face?
Employees of the railroad companies faced many problems.  Many of the Irish workers faced disease and Native American attacks while the Chinese workers have climate issues.   One of these types of issues was the snow and cold temperatures that surrounded the camps and workplaces of the workers.  Another problem was that the Chinese workers had to supply their own food.  Also, there were often long hours for railroad workers, such as from dawn to dusk.

2. What was it like to live as a Pullman employee in the town of Pullman?
Living in the town of Pullman as a Pullman employee was a little like living a city.  The apartment buildings were made of brick and the fact that each one contained many windows made them very nice apartments for the time.  No one was allowed to drink alcohol or hang around on the front steps of buildings.  Those were just two examples of the control over the town.  The rent was also set by Pullman.  This town also consisted of shops, doctors' offices, and a field for athletics.

3. Who was involved in Crédit Mobilier, and what was the purpose of this company?
The Republican Party, mainly representatives in Congress around 1867, Vice-President Schuyler Colfax and James Garfield, were involved in Crédit Mobilier, as well as Crédit Mobilier and its stockholders.  Garfield was a congressman at the time, but would later become president.  The purpose of Crédit Mobilier was to have the stockholder that were part of the Union Pacific Railroad make a contract with Crédit Mobilier to have railroad tracks produced for much more than they actually cost.  Then the stocks were given out as bribes to members of congress and other parts of the government.  The company was mainly created to create large profits and bribe the government while doing very little and getting away with it.

4. In what ways did the railroad companies use their power to hurt farmers?
Railroad companies used their power to hurt farmers.  They would not sell the government land grants to settlers, although this was what the government had wanted.  Instead, they would sell to businesses.  Also, railroads tried to make prices hard on farmers so they would stay in debt.  Tied into this is the fact that they would charge less for long hauls than short hauls because there was not other choice for short hauls. That was how the railroad companies used their power.

5. Why didn’t the decision in the Munn v. Illinois case succeed in checking the power of the railroads?
The Munn v. Illinois case did not succeed because the federal government still had control over business between states.  So if the railroad was going between states, the states could not regulate the railroad and decrease the amount of discrimination.  Since many of the trips were between states, the case did not really succeed in checking the power, which would mean making prices fair, of the railroads.

6. Why didn’t the Interstate Commerce Act immediately limit the power of the railroads?
The Interstate Commerce Act did not limit the power of the railroad immediately.  This is because there were many legal procedures that had to be completed before they could limit the power.  Also, the railroads were resisting the government limiting their power and many almost went bankrupt in the 1890s.  Then, in 1897, it was decided by the Supreme Court that a maximun fair for railroads could not be set.  All of these events contributed to the ICC not truly being effective until 1906.

Big Business and Labor

Read pages 447 – 450 (this is the first half of the chapter section, "Big Business & Labor - 14-3") and then answer the questions below about government’s attempts to regulate big business.

1. What is it?                    

B.  How did it help businesses such as the Carnegie Company and tycoons like Andrew Carnegie?

1. Vertical integration

A. 

Vertical integration is when the raw resources, transportation of supplies and manufacturing are all own by one company.  One obtains the raw materials and transportation system by buying the suppliers.

B. 

Vertical integration helped Andrew Carnegie and Carnegie Company control the steel industry by completely controlling the steel from iron ore to train track.  This control of the suppliers would lead to total control of the industry, which was what was desired in order to have the largest profit.

2. Horizontal integration

A. 

Horizontal integration is when one tries to buy out the other producers of the product.

B. 

Horizontal integration allowed Carnegie to control the prices of steel.  By buying the competitors, the price of the steel was completely up to Carnegie, which was another example of a large amount of control and profit that was gained.

3. Social Darwinism

A. 

Social Darwinism was the belief that those who were wealthy were being blessed by God and the poor were just inferior or did not try hard enough.  Therefore, both groups deserved to be where they were in life.

B. 

Social Darwinism helped Andrew Carnegie because, since he was rich, others believed that he was a good man.  According to Social Darwinism, he had to be because God blessed him and the sign of that was his wealth.

4. Monopoly

A. 

A monopoly was when one company had total control over an industry and the production of a product.  They then were able to control prices, production, and wages.  A monopoly is one person with total control.

B. 

The fact that monopolies could exist helped Carnegie.  When Carnegie had total control they were able to make a large profit.  The large profit clearly helped Carnegie.  Another company that benefitted from monopolies was Standard Oil Company.  John D. Rockefeller had a lucrative monopoly over the oil industry.  Also, J. P. Morgan's United States Steel had a monopoly over the steel industry after Carnegie.

5. Holding company

A. 

A corporation that just buys out other companies in order  to establish a monopoly.  Once the largest company is bought, what was a holding company had a monopoly.

B. 

A holding company, United States Steel, would one day buy out Carnegie, making it difficult to explain how holding companies helped Carnegie.  Andrew Carnegie's company was not a holding company because it functioned as a company that did more than just buy out other companies, but one could say that the company used some of the same ideas as a holding company.   It also could be assumed that if other companies were just being bought by one holding company and nothing was doen with them, that perhaps they gave Carnegie less companies to buy  up and more control.  Yet United States Steel greatly benefited from holding companies.

6. Trust

A. 

A trust is when the stock of two competing companies is given to a board of trustees.  These trustees are responsible for running the two companies, although they were separate, as one company.  John D. Rockefeller implemented this idea with the Standard Oil Company, but it was not a legal merger.

B. 

As mentioned above, businesses and tycoons clearly benefitted from trusts.  These boards and stock exchanges helped Standard Oil merge and take over other companies until they obtained the monopoly that was desired.  This monopoly would then bring them a large profit, clearly helping them.

7. The perception of tycoons as “robber barons”

A. A "robber baron" is basically one who steals from others in order to obtain their fortune.

C. How did it harm businesses such as Standard Oil and tycoons like John D. Rockefeller?

The perception harmed Standard Oil and John D. Rockefeller because the term "robber barons" was negative and just displayed Rockefeller as a power-hungry, greedy man.  This would not make people want to buy from Standard Oil, which would harm Rockefeller.

8. Sherman Antitrust Act

A. The Sherman Antitrust Act was put into place in 1890 in an attempt to keep competition alive.  The technical reason for the act was to make trusts illegal.

C. How did it harm businesses such as Standard Oil and tycoons like John D. Rockefeller?

The Sherman Antitrust Act made trusts illegal because the government was worried that large companies would kill the competition of the economy.  This hurt Standard Oil and Rockefeller for two reasons.  The first was that Rockefeller had often used trusts in the past to gain control and he could not longer do that.  The second was that Rockefeller was on the large companies that the government was worried about, which may have put Standard Oil int he wrong spotlight.

Expansion of Industry

After the Civil War, the United States was still a mostly rural nation. By the 1920s, it had become the leading industrial nation of the world. This immense change was caused by four major factors. Answer the questions for the first two factors.

Factor 1: Abundant Natural Resources

A. Which resources played crucial roles in industrialization?

The resources that played a crucial role in industrialization were oil and steel, which came from iron ore.  Coal was also important.

B. How did Edwin L. Drake help industry to acquire larger quantities of oil?

Edwin L. Drake helped and used the industry to acquire large quantities of oil.  He used a steam engine to drill for the oil.  This efficient way of drilling for oil spread to from Pennsylvania to Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky, and Texas.  That would later increase the petroleum-refining industries.  From petroleum refining, gasoline was created and would later be used to run cars.  All from Edwin L. Drake using the steam engine.

C. How did the Bessemer process allow better use of iron ore?

The Bessemer process would allow for better use of iron ore.  Iron was once used, but it would rust and break.  Iron was made from iron ore.  When the carbon was removed from the iron, it would become steel, which does not rust and is more pliable.  The Bessemer process was one that manufactured steel.  Since steel was a better product, iron ore was used more because of the Bessemer process.

D. What new uses for steel were developed at this time?

 Many new uses for steel were developed at the time.  The metal was used for railroad tracks, bridges, and tall buildings. The Brooklyn Bridge, finished in 1883, was made of steel, as well as the first skyscraper, designed by William Le Baron Jenney.  Also, barbed wire helped increase food production because it made the plains better for farming.  Those were four new uses for steel.

Factor 2: Increasing number of Inventions

A. How did Thomas Alva Edison contribute to this development? 

Thomas Alva Edison contributed to the development of inventions in many ways.  He created the first research laboratory in New Jersey in 1876.  He also perfected the light bulb in 1880 and created a system that would create and distribute electricity.  This allowed for many machines be run, machines that might have been involved in inventions.  Also, it made transportation less expensive, which might have led to an invention.  Another contribution might have been the lengthening of the work day created by the light from the light bulb.   Thomas Alva Edison clearly made several contributions to the development of inventions.

B. How did George Westinghouse contribute to it? 

George Westinghouse contributed much int eh same way.  He made electricity less expensive and safer.  This was it could power more machines because more people could afford it and it was probably more trusted because it was safer.  More machines often meant more inventions of different types of thing as well as improving machines.  Also, the electricity led to electric streetcars being prevalent.  Those are some of the contribution George Westinghouse made.

C. How did Christopher Sholes contribute? 

Christopher Sholes contributed thru his invention of the typewriter in 1867.  This changed the way people worked and allowed information to be recorded in a new way that was most likely quicker.  this would make business and industry more efficient.  

D. How did Alexandar Graham Bell contribute? 

Alexandar Graham Bell contributed with the telephone in 1876.  This increased fast communication and, therefore, faster business and industry.  Also, new jobs for women were created with both the typewriter and telephone.

Factor 3: Expanding Urban Populations Provided new markets for inventions and industrial goods; and provided a ready supply of labor for industry

Factor 4: Government Support of Rapid Industrialization

Tarbell's History of Standard Oil

1. How did Rockefeller set out to acquire control of the oil industry?
Rockefeller set out to acquire control of the oil industry. One of the reasons he did this was to obtain knowledge.  He wanted to know how oil went from the ground to the home and he also thought it was crucial for him to know this in order to be in control of the oil industry.  Another reason was that he liked the competition.  Oil was going to every civilized country, so there was a great deal of competition.  He set out to acquire the control by perfecting refining and transportation.  Then he would organize the areas he would sell to with divisions and then division within divisions who all reported to the division above until headquarters in New York were reached.  So he would obtain control of the oil industry by refining, transporting, and organizing.  The control would come when everyone who bought oil in the area was buying from him.

2. Do you think Rockefeller deserved to be called a "robber baron?" Why or why not?


Rockefeller did not deserve to be called a "robber baron".  He gained control of the oil industry, but to be a robber baron he would have had to do something unethical to obtain his wealth.  Rockefeller did not do anything immoral.  He simply learned how to control an industry.  Refining, transportation, and organization are moral actions.  According to the source, he did not have slaves working for him and he was not killing off his competition.  The fact that eventually he had not competition mad it extremely hard for others in the business and they were probably poor after a while.  This is not too immoral though.  He did employ many people and if he could find a way to make a large amount of money it is not an awful thing.  He did not deserve to be called a "robber baron". 

Telling New Stories

1. What were the two versions of the Camp Grant attack that existed among the U.S. public, and who supported each view? 

Version One of the Event: 
The Apache had taken the cattle of settlers and killed a few settlers.  They were simply fighting back and this was a great victory for man over savages.

Who supported Version One?
The local settlers supported this version.  The Mexican Americans and O'odhams who also fought most likely believed this version, if not something similar.

Version Two of the Event: 
Many Native Americans, who were supposed to have been protected by an American peace policy they agreed to, were killed.  Of those slaughtered, many were children and women.  The settlers had killed innocent people without any reason for attacking.

Who supported Version Two?
The U.S. government as well as one of the first men to bring up this version, Lieutenant Whitham.  This version was also supported by some reformers hoping to change society.

2. Why was the trial that took place after the attack significant? 
The trial that took place after the attack was brought on by pressure being placed on the leaders by those who considered the event to be a massacre.  Since this was a large part of the East, the government had to do something and arrested the leaders of the attackers in October of 1871.  The trial that took place against the leaders was the first trial in the Arizona Territory to be against people who were not Apache for killing Apache people.  That is what made the trial significant.


3. Whose views were absent in the accounts of this attack that were told in the United States? 
Many views of the attack were not heard or told in the United States.  Although there were more than enough white views, the O'odham people, Mexican Americans, and Apache did not have the opportunity to tel their story.

4. Why have Native American views been excluded from the story of U.S. expansion that is told in the United States? 
The Native American views have been excluded from the story of U.S. expansion that is told in the United States.  That is because these views would sully the image of U.S. expansion.  It is much more pleasant to believe that the U.S. blessed the continent by spreading a country full of opportunity and liberty.  The Native American view would speak about the racism faced, deaths due to being moved around or just killed by settlers, and the hostility.  This story would ruin the pleasant one, so it is not told in the United States.

5. What were the two parts of the U.S. government's assiimilation plan in the late nineteenth century? 

a. 
To move all of the Native Americans onto reservations was the first part.  The purpose of this part was to, hopefully, help with the  second part.

b. 
The second art of the plan for assimilation was to rid the Indians of Indian culture.  The reservations came into play here because they thought this would be easier if the Native Americans were in concentrated groups.  The goal was not only to erasing their culture, but to have them adopt an American way of life, such as independently farming small areas of land, speaking English, and being Christian.

6. Give two examples of how U.S. policy makers forced Indian groups to give up their cultures? 


a. 
U.S. policy makers prohibited Indian religious and cultural ceremonies.

b. 
Many Indian children were taken from the reservations and placed in boarding schools.  The reformers that ran these believed that once the children learned English and American values they would want to enter society in the U.S..  Thus, in a generation all Indian culture would disappear due to the fact that the youngest group would be completely immersed in American society.

7. What effect did the railroad have on U.S. settlement of the West? 
The railroad affected U.S. settlement of the West.  Before the railroad, the West consisted of small farms and hunting and gathering.  With the railroad, moving out west took much less time.  This led to an increase in population.  That also meant that moving goods was faster.  So the economy boomed with the transportation of natural resources found in the area.  Soon the West was a place of substantial corporations, cities, and industries.

8. How did westward expansion fuel U.S. industrialization? 
Westward expansion fueled U.S. industrialization with the area's natural resources.  America became one of the most productive countries because of all of the raw materials collected in the area, such as lumbar and gold.  Also, the amount of immigrants that cam to America at the time helped to start industries as well as the railroad that transported the goods.  Yet the main way westward expansion fueled U.S. industrialization was through the many natural resources of the west.

Experiencing U.S. Expansion: Southern Arizona - Part II

6. What two threats did Mexico face in its northern frontier in the mid-nineteenth century?

a.  After the establicimientos de paz failed, some in Mexico wanted to abolish all Apaches and this was around 1832.  There was eventually a call for all men to serve in the military to fight the Apaches.  Peace agreements with a band may be made, but only for the Mexicans to kill them during what were supposed to be peaceful meetings.  This went on for at least ten years and many referred to the situation in the north as a "continual state of war".

b.  The United States of America was the other threat.  The United States thought they would be able to control the Indians more than the Mexicans and wanted the natural resources of the area.  That meant they were seeking ways to gain the land and would eventually march to Mexico City.  Before that action, Americans would trade with the Apaches and supply them with good such as guns, which they were using against the Mexicans, and help the Mexicans fight the Apache.

7. Why did the Gadsden Purchase have such a great impact on northern Mexicans?
The Gadsden Purchase had a great impact on northern Mexicans.  That is because the land sold to the U.S. in the Gadsden Purchase contained many Mexicans and Mexican cities.  These Mexicans felt that the government had betrayed them by selling their land to America, clearly impacting them.

8. List two ways that cultural misunderstanding contributed to a growing conflict between U.S. settlers
and Apache groups.

a. Some U.S. settlers thought that by making a peace agreement with one group of Native Americans, they were also making a pact with several.  However, the Native Americans believed that this agreement was only with their group.  This meant that other groups continued to raid the U.S. settlement.

b.  It was not rare that U.S. settlers would not be able to tell the different Native American groups apart.  This meant that they would think that the groups they had made peace agreements with, their allies, would be attacking them and breaking the treaties.  Also, when countering the damages done or hostages taken, the Americans might just attack the first Native American group they saw  This did not ease the tension within the groups.


9. How did the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the Gadsden Purchase spark a civil war in...

a. Mexico?
The  Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the Gadsden Purchase sparked a civil war in Mexico.  This is because many  citizens were upset with the large amount of land that was lost and thought this hurt the image of the nation.  It was believed by many that the economy, government, and society needed to be changed.  This led to Santa Ana's government being overthrown in 1854 and a new government being put into place in 1861. 

b. the United States?
  The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the Gadsden Purchase sparked the civil war in the U.S.  There were many arguments over if the new land should contain slave or free states.  The debates spurred by the new land increased tensions that would lead to a civil war.

10. a. What did many U.S. settlers want U.S. policy towards the Apache to be?
Many U.S. settlers  wanted the U.S. policy towards the apache to be violence.  They believed that the violence by the Apaches must be met with violence because the Native americans only understood violence.  They also though the harsher response would bring a stop to the actions of the Apaches against the settlers more effectively, although some said that it would be better to get rid of the Apaches all together.

b. In what ways did this clash with the federal government’s Peace Policy?
The federal government's Peace Policy stated that Native Americans would move to reservations where the U.S. government would support them. It was also believed that, by making the reservations isolated, raiding would stop.  This was a very different plan from the settlers' call for violence.  Many settlers were upset that the Apaches were not being punished, leading some citizens to take matters into their own hands and raid the Apaches.

11. Why were the Apache hesitant to move onto reservations?
The Apache were hesitant to move onto reservations, such as Fort Apache, mainly because they did not trust the U.S. government.  There were stories of the U.S. waging war with the Navajo to force them onto a reservation and there were also rumors that the reservations were to make it easier for the U.S. to kill all of the Apaches.  The other reason they were hesitant to move is that the reservations would not allow the migrations that was tradition with the Apache.  Clearly, the Apache would be hesitant to move onto reservations.