Author(s): | Burrows, Edwin G. Wallace, Mike |
---|---|
Reviewer(s): | Goldin, Milton |
Published by EH.NET (February 1999)
Edwin G. Burrows and Mike Wallace. Gotham: A History of New York City to
1898.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. xxiv + 1383 pp.
Illustrations, maps, references, bibliography, and indexes. $49.95 (cloth),
ISBN 0-19-511634-8.
Reviewed for H-Business by Milton Goldin, National Coalition of Independent
Scholars (NCIS).
MiltonG 525@AOL.COM
Gotham demonstrates the wisdom of never judging a book by its cover —
or by its heft. Its dust jacket suggests yet another in the apparently endless
series of New York City social histories; and given its nearly five pounds,
suspicious readers may leap to the conclusion that Burrows and Wallace are
academics who never saw a detail they could not include. To the contrary,
the book is an extraordinary interweaving of business history and social
history that results in a reference work which
not only tells us how, but why, the metropolis was well on its way to becoming
the financial capital of the world on New Year’s Eve in 1898, when “the
nation’s first- and fourth-largest cities would merge into a supercity —
Greater New York —
that would
encompass not only Manhattan and Brooklyn, but Queens, Staten Island, and the
Bronx as well” (p. 1218).
The authors move quickly from Manhattan’s earliest Indian inhabitants to Peter
Stuyvesant’s New Amsterdam, founded in 1624 as a fur-trading outpost for the
Dutch West India Company. Dutch settlers were very different in temperament
from Puritan settlers — more phlegmatic, less fanatical, and far more
interested in making money, legally or otherwise, than in probing deeper
meanings of Christianity. An other major difference was that the Dutch
displayed unruly traits not usually encountered among devout types.
Saloonkeepers ignored regulations to close on time, not to sell liquor on
Sundays during preachings, and not to pawn articles that customers offered for
drink. Stuyvesant increased fines for settlers who struck other settlers, but
New Amsterdam’s residents evidently considered such pleasures well worth the
penalties; court records suggest they hit each other as often as possible.[1]
From the time
the Dutch arrived, England was claiming title to New Amsterdam. But not until
1664 could London assemble armed forces to seize the settlement. Stuyvesant
wanted to resist, but inhabitants did not much care who ruled them so long as
they could freely pursue commercial interests and amusement, and they opted to
surrender.
During the remainder of the seventeenth century and since that time, the basic
question that perplexed Stuyvesant and the earliest citizens would perplex
English and then American political leaders and populations: How can
commercial establishments interested almost exclusively in status,
wealth, and power prevent from flying apart a community of increasing
diversity?
In their introduction, which serves as a tour de horizon not only for
this volume but for a forthcoming volume in what will be a history of New York
City to the present time, Burrows and Wallace make clear the extent to which
commerce has dominated the city: “After the Civil War, the metropolis became
the principal facilitator of America’s own industrialization and imperial
(westward) expansion.”(p. xvii). And, by the 19th century’s end,
“New York had gained the ability to direct, not just channel, America’s
industrialization. Financiers like J.P. Morgan established nation wide
corporations and housed them in the city, making Manhattan the country’s
corporate headquarters. When World War I ended European hegemony, and the
United States became a creditor nation, New York began to vie with London as
fulcrum of the global economy.”(p. xviii). Key developments in facilitating
the city’s “imperial expansion” were the opening of the Erie Canal in October
1825 and railroads, from the late 1850s. Other cities along the eastern
seaboard resented New York’s burgeoning fortunes, but unfortunately for them,
they began digging canals too late. Only with railroads could other cities hope
to compete, and in 1860, counting “the still-heavy volume of traffic on the
Erie Canal, [New York] received $161 million worth of goods from the West, just
about the value of that year’s cotton crop.”(p.655).
While some
entrepreneurs thus demonstrated their extraordinary talents
positioning New York vis-a-vis national and international commerce,
others made speculation in real estate an art form. The
real estate market was driven not only by needs of the rich for factories and
palaces for themselves but by immigrants who poured into the city thanks to its
promise of employment. Employers never adverse to paying the lowest wages
possible had no complaints about realtors extracting the highest rents
imaginable from workers.
Like the Dutch, English and American elite had no great fondness for
non-Protestants. Jews were tolerated because they took care of their own poor.
The problem through much of the
19th century was with immigrants who might be Christians but who also happened
to be Catholics. In particular there were the Irish, driven from their
ancestral homeland by indescribably cruel English policies. To the dismay of
New York’s Establishments,
not only were Irish Catholics unable to finance care for their poor, but by
definition they were guilty of allegiance to Rome. Adding to their misery,
in searching for employment the Irish resented seeing such signals of
disapproval as signs reading, “No
Irish need apply.”
What the authors call “the sharply unequal distribution of wealth in the city”
(p. 144) did not calm nerves. In 1730, “a comprehensive property assessment
revealed that the richest 10 percent of the city’s taxable population, some 140
merchants and landowners, held almost half its taxable wealth.”(p. 144). In
1800, “the richest 20 percent owned almost 80 percent of the city’s wealth. The
bottom half owned under 5 percent.”(p. 351). By 1892, “60 percent of the
leaders of New York’s national corporations,
investment banks, and railroads were descendants of old-monied families.”(p.
1083). In New Amsterdam, care of the poor had been left to religious groups,
but with the English came secular welfare policies that continue to inform City
Fathers more than three hundred years later. From 1685, “deserving poor . . .
received assistance for their Reliefe out of the public Treasury,”(p. 145),
the idea being to keep them out of sight and to get them off welfare rolls as
quickly as possible.
Non-residents bereft of money, who happened to be passing through, and all
able-bodied residents judged fit to work but unemployed got nothing. Only
“deserving poor” were thought worthy of receiving charity. Who were the
“deserving poor?” Those persons who appeared to be in distress through no
fault of their own, such as widows, the sick, and cripples. “Paupers” could
receive no charity; their situations clearly stemmed from laziness, fraud, and
assorted moral degeneracies. Little was said about the unspeakable practice in
Colonial New York of setting free aged or infirm slaves to save money,
“a practice so widespread by1773 that in order to keep down the cost of relief,
the legislature imposed a fine of twenty pounds on the last owner of any
freedman found begging in the city.”(pp. 192-3).
Gotham inevitably gives rise to thoughts about histories of the
metropolis. Not for the first time, a book that deals with the impact of
business on cities makes me wish that more writers would address confrontation
s between classes rather than offer smorgasbord portrayals of admired,
colorful, celebrated personalities, descriptions of magnificent,
soaring, unique architectural achievements, and encomiums for world-famous,
inspiring arts centers and art museums endowed by the rich who thus serve the
masses. Struggles for power and class conflict are also what business history
is about — in cities as well as within countries.
[1] For accounts of life in New Amsterdam, see Carl Bridenbaugh. Cities in
the Wilderness
: The First Century of Urban Life in America, 1625-1741.
(New York, 1966); J. Franklin Jameson, editor. Narratives of New Netherland,
1609-1664. (New York, 1909).
Subject(s): | Urban and Regional History |
---|---|
Geographic Area(s): | North America |
Time Period(s): | 19th Century |