The educated man fails less often than does his uneducated fellow. Every day at school worth nine dollars. have wearied of the intellectual labor of the school and would have left it early. . . . Other influences also doubtless modify the result; but after due allowance for all these factors is made there remains still a large margin of superior efficiency on the part of the educated that one must credit to education. . . ... [A study conducted by H. J. Hapgood] brought out especially the large per cent of successes among college-bred men in responsible, high-salaried positions, and the comparatively small per cent of successes on the part of the non-college-bred men. He says: "A notable instance of the value of college men is furnished by the Western Electric Co., which began employing college men about ten years ago, and has found that 90 per cent of them make good, as compared with 10 per cent of the men who enter business on leaving the high or grammar school. ... [Studies conducted in Springfield (Mass.), and Brooklyn,] represent a fair average of what may be expected as a result of a good school system. The life expectancy of the average high-school boy is more than 40 years. If we [assume, as statistics show that we have a right to assume, an] average annual salary of $1,000 for a period of 40 years, and compare it with the illiterate laborer's salary of $500 per year for the same length of time, we can see how richly the child and the community are repaid for each day the child attends school. $1,000 for 40 years equals. Difference. $40,000 20,000 $20,000 Twelve years of 180 days each, or a total of 2,160 days of school, bring the child, therefore, an added life income of $20,000, or a return of between nine and ten dollars for each day spent in school. . . . Questions on the foregoing Readings 1. What, at present, is the attitude of most authorities toward the question of standardizing all of the educational facilities of the nation? 2. What were the recommendations of the U. S. Bureau of Education with regard to the centralization of the state school system in Arizona? 3. Outline the recommendations of the Bureau with respect to higher standards for teachers in Arizona. 4. Why is the problem of financing the schools increasingly important? 5. Compare the amounts spent on the schools of Columbia, South Carolina, with the amounts expended for this purpose in other cities. 6. What are some elements in a campaign to secure more adequate financial support of the schools? 7. Why ought it not to be difficult to secure this support? 8. How many states had compulsory attendance laws by 1914? Discuss the problem of securing the school attendance of the children of poor parents. 9. 10. What is the importance of state agents charged with the enforcement of the school attendance laws? II. What is the present tendency with regard to setting the age limits in compulsory attendance laws? 12. Summarize the important factors in the enforcement of compulsory school attendance laws. 13. Give an example of a problem which may arise in connection with the relation of general or liberal to vocational education. 14. What problem arises in connection with the time at which vocational education should be begun? 15. Give some examples of problems which arise in connection with the transference of the results of vocational education. 16. Illustrate the difficulty of dividing the pupil's time and energy between technical and practical training. 17. At what age should home-making education be begun? 18. Name some activities which figure prominently in the wider use of the school plant movement. 19. Give an example of the wider use of the school plant between the dismissal of afternoon classes and nightfall. 20. Summarize the attitude of the Joliet (Ill.) Board of Education toward the wider use of the school plant. 21. Why is it important to point out the money value of education? 22. What did a study of Who's Who in America reveal as to the value of education? 23. Illustrate the statement that "the educated man fails less often " than the uneducated. 24. What were the results, so far as the money value of education is concerned, of the studies conducted in Springfield (Mass.) and Brooklyn? Rapid de velopment of rate form of the corpo business organization. The beginnings of what later developed into the U.S. Steel 語 PART IV - AMERICAN POLITICAL PROBLEMS a. SOME ECONOMIC FUNCTIONS OF GOVERNMENT CHAPTER XXVII PUBLIC INTEREST IN BUSINESS: REGULATION 157. An example of industrial combination 1 One of the most spectacular chapters in the history of industry deals with the origin and development of those business organizations which are popularly known as trusts. Formerly most businesses were carried on either by individuals or by a small number of partners; within the last half century there has been so steady a development of corporate organization that to-day the great corporation is the dominant form of business organization. In the following selection Professor Chester W. Wright illustrates the development of "big business" by tracing the history of the United States Steel Corporation: In the year 1858 one Andrew Kloman and his brother started a small iron forge at Allegheny, Pa. Their plant was worth about $5,000. They made a reputation for putting out good and reliable products, particularly axles for railroads, and the business prosCorporation. pered. During the Civil War the demand for iron was enormously increased and the iron and steel industry grew rapidly and was very prosperous. [In 1863 Andrew Carnegie bought an interest in the business, and] in 1865 this partnership was consolidated with another in which Carnegie also had an interest, and took the name of the Union Iron Mills Co. . . . The busi ness, originally small, grows rapidly after the Civil War. The Union Iron Mills consumed large quantities of pig iron, and the owners decided that they could obtain it at less cost if they made their own pig iron instead of buying it. In 1870 a group of them organized a separate company and erected the Lucy blast furnace 1 From the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Education, Lessons in Community and National Life. Washington, 1918. Series A; pp. 209212, 217-218. growth and tion, in combina which Mr. to smelt ore and make pig iron. . . . In 1874 a number of men connected with the Union Iron Mills and some others who were interested in railroads organized the Edgar Thomson Steel Co., and a very efficient big plant was erected for the manufacture of steel rails. . . . Another step toward integration and the further harmonizing Further of interests was taken in 1881 when the Thomson steel works, the Lucy furnaces, the Union Iron Mills, and some coke properties, together with $1,000,000 new capital, were all combined into one firm with a capital of $5,000,000. Mr. Carnegie, who had on various previous occasions acquired the interests of some of his partners in these concerns, owned a little more than half of the stock of this company and it was known as Carnegie Bros. & Co. (Ltd.). A further important move toward integration was made the following year when the Carnegie interests purchased a large amount of stock in the Frick Coke Co., which was the dominant owner of coal lands and coke ovens in the Connellsville district, whence came the best coking coal used in smelting iron ore. Carnegie figures prominently. nation of competitors. In 1881 some competitors of the Carnegie Co. opened a big plant The elimiat Homestead for the manufacture of steel ingots, billets, and rails, but they met with financial difficulties and two years later sold out to the Carnegie interests. . . . In 1890 another threatening rival was eliminated when the newly erected Duquesne steel works were purchased. In 1892 the various Carnegie interests were again consolidated in the Carnegie Steel Co. (Ltd.), with a capital of $25,000,000. ... ... ... ment of new competitors There were also organized during these years, the Federal The developSteel Co. . . . and the National Steel Co. Both of these steel companies were combinations of other companies and both were competitors of the Carnegie Steel Co. Seeing dangers of competition ahead, the Carnegie companies threatened low prices and the loss of big profits which prosperity seemed to promise. Moreover, the bankers and promoters who still held a large amount of stock in the new combinations were anxious to sell their stocks to the public, and they knew that if a competitive war broke out in the steel business the value of these stocks would fall and the public would hesitate to buy. This furnished an added reason for trying to harmonize the conflicting interests. leads to the U.S. Steel The concen tration of power due to indus trial integration. In 1882 a enter an to form a limited number of It was under these circumstances that a meeting of the leading men in the steel industry was called, and in 1901 under the leadership of Mr. J. P. Morgan the plan to consolidate all of these concerns and small combinations in one gigantic company to be called the United States Steel Corporation, with a capitalization of about $1,400,000,000, was carried through. The Steel Corporation as then organized owned 149 steel works of various kinds, vast ore, coal, gas, and limestone properties, over 1,000 miles of railroad, and over 100 vessels on the Great Lakes. It at that time controlled about two-thirds of the country's total output of steel ingots, billets, rails, castings, nails, plates, structural shapes, and sheet steel, and about three-quarters of the output of wire rods and tin plate. 158. A typical trust agreement 1 ... From the standpoint of the public welfare, a significant element in the development of great business concerns has been the concentration of power. An early method of securing this concentration of power was for a number of concerns to enter a specific agreement which allowed all of their combined resources to be directed as a unit. The most famous of agreements of this kind was the "trust" device, first used by the Standard Oil Company, in 1882. Some of the significant elements in this original trust agreement are given below: This agreement [is] made and entered upon this second day of January, A.D. 1882, by and between [more than a dozen oil companies, as well as numerous designated individuals.] . . II. The parties hereto do covenant and agree to and with each other, each in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements of the others, as follows: (1) As soon as practicable a corporation shall be formed in each of the following states, under the laws thereof, to-wit: Ohio, New corporations York, Pennsylvania and New Jersey; to carry on the oil business. (2) The purposes and powers of said corporations shall be to mine for, produce, manufacture, refine, and deal in petroleum and all 1 From the United States Industrial Commission, Preliminary Report on Trusts and Industrial Combinations. Washington, 1900. Vol. 1, pp. 1221-1225. |