Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T08:26:37.010Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

American Business Philanthropy and Higher Education in the Nineteenth Century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2012

Daniel A. Wren
Daniel A. Wren
Affiliation:
Professor of Business Administration, the University of Oklahoma
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Nineteenth century America witnessed the expansion of business enterprise as well as the extension of a system of higher education. Business philanthropy played a substantial role in higher education by filling the gap between the church-supported colleges of the colonial period and the state colleges and universities of later years. The philanthropy of American business leaders provided for scientific and polytechnical schools, opened colleges for women, extended new opportunities for black “freedmen,” and created the first undergraduate and graduate schools of business. Although nineteenth century law prohibited corporate philanthropy and offered no tax incentives, business leaders gave because they thought that they were stewards of wealth, they saw a need for practical education, they wished to create memorials for loved ones, and they desired to meet the needs of special groups of individuals.

Type
Research Article
Information
Business History Review , Volume 57 , Issue 3 , Autumn 1983 , pp. 321 - 346
Copyright
Copyright © The President and Fellows of Harvard College 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Hill, George Birkbeck, Harvard College by an Oxonian, New York, 1906, 18.Google Scholar

2 Jordan, W. K., The Charities of London, 1480–1660, New York, 1960, 206–267Google Scholar; Jordan, W. K., Philanthropy in England, 1480–1660, New York, 1959, 143–147 and 279–295Google Scholar; and Owen, David, English Philanthropy, 1660–1960, Cambridge, MA, 1964, 346 and 398–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar This flow of philanthropy is probably what led Adam Smith to complain that educational charity tended to favor the established rather than encouraging the emerging college or university. See Smith, Adam, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, London, 1776, Vol. IIGoogle Scholar, Book V, Chapter I, Part III, Article II, 341–43. Apparently, Great Britain is not an isolated case in the lack of business philanthropy for higher education during this period. While Beard notes a number of Dutch, German, and Italian businessmen as patrons of the arts, the only giver to higher education she mentions is Gresham. Beard, Miriam, A History of Business (2 volumes), Ann Arbor, MI, 1938, p. 240.Google Scholar

3 Sears, Jesse B., Philanthropy in the History of American Higher Education, Washington, D.C., 1922, 12–13.Google Scholar These seven, and their religious affiliation, were William & Mary (Church of England), Yale (Congregational), Princeton (Presbyterian), Columbia (Church of England), Brown (Baptists), Rutgers (Dutch Reformed), and Dartmouth (started by Reverend Eleazar Wheelock to Christianize the Indians). Foster, Margery S., “Out of Smalle Beginnings…”: An Economic History of Harvard College 1636–1712, Cambridge, MA, 1962, 106–112.Google Scholar Foster's study indicates that merchants and “merchant connected” individuals were substantial benefactors of Harvard in the seventeenth century; see 108–116. See also Morison, Samuel E., The Founding of Harvard College, Cambridge, MA, 1935, 168.Google Scholar

4 Thwing, Charles F., A History of Higher Education in America, New York, 1906, 324–325.Google ScholarKelley, Brooks M., Yale: A History, New Haven, 1974, 143Google Scholar; Harris, Seymour E., The Economics of Harvard, New York, 1960, xlviii and 210Google Scholar; Norris, Edwin M., The Story of Princeton, Boston, 1917, 148 and 212Google Scholar; and Richardson, Leon B., History of Dartmouth College (2 vols.), Hanover, NH, 1932, Vol. I, 404.Google Scholar

5 The basic sources of data are the annual reports of the Commissioner of Education, Bureau of Education, Department of the Interior, 1868–1899. Since there was no central source of educational data prior to 1868, and since the annual reports vary in format from year to year, over two hundred histories of colleges and universities were examined for earlier philanthropies as well as to verify and supplement the annual reports. Very helpful in locating college and university histories were the bibliographies in Rudolph, Frederick, The American College and University, New York, 1962, 497–512Google Scholar, and Brubacher, John S. and Rudy, Willis, Higher Education in Transition, third edition, New York, 1976, 515–527.Google Scholar Based on a random sample of the annual reports, approximately 86% of the donors gave amounts less than $24,999; 7% gave from $25,000-$49,999; 4% from $50,000-$74,999; 1% from $75,000-$99,999; and 3% gave $100,000 or more. Thus the $50,000 floor would include about 8% of the donors. Of the 205 donors, 165 were in business related activities, 6 were lawyers, 1 a journalist, 3 in agriculture or ranching, 2 were engineers, 1 a minister, 1 a medical doctor, 7 inherited family property, and 19 eluded identification as to occupation. Biographical sources used included: Who was Who In America; Dictionary of American Biography; National Cyclopedia of Biography; Hunt, Freeman, Lives of American Merchants, 2 volumes, New York, 1858Google Scholar; Chamberlain, Joshua L. (ed.) Universities and Their Sons, 5 Volumes, Boston, 1898Google Scholar; Forbes, A. and Greene, J. W., Rich Men of Massachusetts, Boston, 1851Google Scholar; Holloway, Laura C., Famous American Fortunes, New York: J. A. Hill Co., 1889Google Scholar; Bolton, Sarah Knowles, Famous Givers and Their Gifts, New York, 1971Google Scholar (reprint of 1896 edition); Ratner, Sidney, New Light on the History of Great American Fortunes; American Millionaires of 1882 and 1902, New York, 1953Google Scholar; and Hall, Henry (ed.), America's Successful Men of Affairs, 2 Volumes, New York, 1896.Google Scholar

6 See the comments of a pioneer minerologist, Dana, James Dwight, “Science and Scientific Schools,” American Journal of Education, Vol. 2 (1856), 374.Google Scholar The leading schools in Europe were the École Polytechnique de France (Paris, 1795), the Königliche Sächsische Bergacademie (Freiberg, 1765), The Polytechnisches Institut (Vienna, 1815), and the École Centrale des Arts et Manufactures (Paris, 1829).

7 Cited in Earnest, Ernest, Academic Procession: The American College, 1636 to 1953, New York, 1953, 237.Google Scholar

8 Morison, Samuel Eliot, The Founding of Harvard College, Cambridge, Mass., 1935, 106.Google Scholar Historians disagree about for whom Brown University was named. Bronson says it was for Nicholas Brown; see Bronson, Walter C., The History of Brown University 1764–1914, Providence, R.I., 1914, 155–157Google Scholar; while Moses Brown, erstwhile partner of Samuel Slater, gets the credit in Thompson, Mack, Moses Brown: Reluctant Reformer, Chapel Hill, N.C., 1962, 54–69.Google Scholar Moses and Nicholas and other Browns were prominent businessmen of Providence so it is likely that Brown University was a family endeavor.

9 Price, Carl F., Wesleyan's First Century, Middletown, Conn., 1932, 90 and 109.Google ScholarWhite, Bouck, The Book of Daniel Drew, New York, 1910, 407.Google Scholar

10 Becker, Carl L., Cornell University: Founders and Founding, Ithaca, N.Y., 1943, 103–107Google Scholar and 154. Holden's story is in Notestein, Lucy L., Wooster of the Middle West, Kent, Ohio, Kent State University Press, 1971, 8–9.Google Scholar Frick's biographer says Frick “responded” to a request from Wooster for a contribution but refused to have the library named after him. See Harvey, George B., Henry Clay Frick: The Man, New York, 1928, 350.Google Scholar

11 Gras, N.S.B. and Larson, Henrietta M., Casebook in American Business History, New York, 1939, 52–61.Google Scholar Owen maintains that the Gothic cathedrals were built mainly on appeals to guilt or vanity. Thus the “butter tower” of the Rouen Cathedral was financed by the sale of indulgences to eat butter during Lent. See Owen, Virginia Lee, “Gothic Cathedral Building as Public Works,” in Soltow, James H. (ed.), Essays in Economic and Business History, East Lansing, Michigan State University, 1979, 286.Google Scholar

12 Jesse B. Sears, Philanthropy, 44. Constance Ellis, D. (ed.), The Magnificent Enterprise: A Chronicle of Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, N.Y., 1961, 5.Google Scholar The main resistance to co-education at Cornell came from the all-male student body who preferred, as one observer described it, “congenial savagery.” See Woody, Thomas, A History of Women's Education in the United States, (2 Volumes), New York, 1929, Vol. 2, 249.Google Scholar Radcliffe was named after Lady Mowlson, neé Ann Radcliffe, who was the first woman to make a gift to Harvard (1641). Hawkins, Hugh, Pioneer: A History of the Johns Hopkins University 1874–1889, Ithaca, N.Y., Cornell University Press, 1960, 267.Google Scholar

13 See Leavell, Ullin W., Philanthropy in Negro Education, Nashville, 1930, 64 and 126Google Scholar; Jesse B. Sears Philanthropy, 82–89; Curti, Merle and Nash, Roderick, Philanthropy in the Shaping of American Higher Education, New Brunswick, N.J., 1965Google Scholar, Chapter 8, and Weaver, Warren, United States Philanthropic Foundations: Their History, Structure, Management, and Record, New York, Harper and Row, 1967, 24–25.Google Scholar

14 Marshall, Leon C. (ed.), The Collegiate School of Business: Its Status at the Close of the First Quarter of the Twentieth Century, Chicago, 1928, 55.Google Scholar

15 Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 519 (1819). Proprietors of the Charles River Bridge v. Proprietors of the Warren Bridge, 36 U.S. (11 Peters) 420 (1837). This case is a favorite of legal historians: see, for examples, Horwitz, Morton J., The Transformation of American Law 1780–1860, Cambridge, Mass., 1977, 117–130Google Scholar; Kutler, Stanley I., Privilege and Creative Destruction: The Charles River Bridge Case, New York, 1971Google Scholar; and Dodd, Edwin Merrick, American Business Corporations Until 1860, with Special Reference to Massachusetts, Cambridge, Mass., 1954, p. 31.Google Scholar

16 Davis v. Old Colony Railway Company, 131 Mass. 258–1881. Hutton v. West Cork Railroad Company, 23 Chancery Division Reports 654–1883. Steinway v. Steinway and Sons, 40 N.Y.S. 718–1896.

17 This discussion is based on the excellent material in Paul, Randolph E., Taxation in the United States, Boston, 1954Google Scholar; also useful, especially on inheritance taxation, were Howe, Frederic C., Taxation and Taxes in the United States 1791–1895, New York, 1896Google Scholar, and West, Max, The Inheritance Tax, New York, Columbia University 1908.Google ScholarPollack v. Farmer's Loan and Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429, 158 U.S. 601 (1895). In the first instance, Justice Jackson was ill and the Court stalemated at 4–4; in the second instance, Jackson voted to uphold the act, but another justice changed his mind and the act was declared void 5–4. See Friedman, 497.

18 Report of the President of Harvard College, 1898–99, cited in Harris, Economics of Harvard, 288.