THE REFORM MOVEMENT IN OHIO AT THE TURN
OF THE CENTURY
By JAMES H. RODABAUGH*
The end of the nineteenth century, in a
very real sense,
sounded the knell of the frontier or
pioneer period of American
development, and opened the doors upon a
new era in which in-
dustrialization and its concomitant
social and economic reorgani-
zation and readjustments and political
bewilderment were the
dominant forces. Frederick Jackson
Turner opened his remark-
ably perceptive presidential address
before the American His-
torical Association in 191O with these
words: "The transforma-
tions through which the United States is
passing in our own day
are so profound, so far-reaching, that
it is hardly an exaggeration
to say that we are witnessing the birth
of a new nation in
America."
It is not necessary here to recall the
revolution in the economic
and social structure of this country
which followed the Civil War.
Stimulated by the war itself, industry
began its expansion. Rein-
forced by the rationalizations of
laissez faire and frontier indi-
vidualism, industrial capital proceeded
to build its empire. Wealth
increased, industrial production
skyrocketed, and new inventions
added to the range of life. But these
were counterbalanced by
poverty and class conflict. The control
of the nation's wealth and
production rapidly concentrated in the
hands of a relatively small
proportion of the population. The other
side of the picture is a
story of pauperism and slums, of disease
and crime, of sordid-
ness and unhappiness among the millions
who crowded into the
cities.
Technical advances came too rapidly and
wealth skyrocketed
too suddenly for our political
institutions, which were not ad-
vanced in tempo with the changes of
industrialization. In the
* This paper was read at the
Mississippi Valley Historical Association meeting,
April 21, 1944, at St. Louis, Missouri.
(46)
REFORM MOVEMENT IN OHIO 47
resultant confusion, politics became a
field for exploitation by
those who could exact personal
advantage, and natural resources,
the labor supply and the consumer were
the victims. At the same
time the field of politics was opened to
panaceas and to experiment
and study for social benefit, as the
protective forces of our demo-
cratic body politic instinctively
assembled for combat. Democracy
was now faced with the problem, namely:
whether and how to in-
terfere with the independence and
individual privileges of a few
who were accumulating vast economic and
political power in order
to guarantee security and happiness to
the mass of people. The
business of government had been a
relatively easy one and inter-
fered very little with the personal
lives or property of its citizens.
The public and its political
representatives were little prepared for
the consideration of the problems of
economic democracy, namely,
the insecurity of a great segment of the
population and increasing
disparity of classes in American
society.
The articulation of the forces of unrest
and of democracy
took several forms. Labor organizations
came into being and
reacted to assaults upon the working
classes with strikes, and in
some cases riots. The farmers of the
South and West, in Populist
Revolt, manifested confused rebellion
against the financial su-
premacy of the East, seeking, on the one
hand, to achieve economic
democracy through cooperative and
collective controls, and, on the
other, demanding a return to the
agrarian ideal of individualism.
Meanwhile, on the stage of popular
unrest, philosophers and
preachers appeared to teach the new
democracy. Perhaps the most
effective of these was Henry George,
whose greatest contribution
lay in his acute analysis of the
unhealthy development of indus-
trial civilization and his thesis that
the state might be the instru-
ment of freedom and equality of the
individual. With Edward
Bellamy the state, through a program for
a planned society, became
the instrument for enforcing the
subserviency of material condi-
tions to the well-being of the
individual. The third great voice
was that of Henry Demarest Lloyd who
vehemently protested
against business combinations such as
the Standard Oil, and elo-
quently preached the glories of a
socialistic or "co-operative"
48
OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL
QUARTERLY
commonwealth. "Before every revolution marches a book."
Before the movement for economic
democracy marched three
books, Progress and Poverty, Wealth
against Commonwealth, and
Looking Backward. These were the effective propaganda tools
upon which the prophets of
humanitarianism, the preachers of the
Social Gospel, and the agents of
economic democracy based their
attack upon the evils of the
industrial-capitalistic economy.
In the movement for economic democracy
its leaders concen-
trated upon municipal government. Local
government had been
the foundation of American democracy. It
was upon the city,
therefore, that the attention of the
reformers was turned. The
city, the spawn of the industrial order,
became "the hope of
democracy." The city, like the
country as a whole, had grown too
fast. "Disorganization, confusion,
incoherence" reigned as the
urban center was called upon to meet new
responsibilities. The
city became a source of income for
certain interests: the special
privileges of city contracts and public
utilities were fat plums for
businessmen. Utilities companies watered
stocks, maintained high
rates, used inadequate equipment, and
gave as poor service as they
could force upon the people. In order to
hold the goose that was
laying the golden eggs, businessmen
nurtured political machines
with the profits, and fed them in
maturity with the fat that could
be fried from political jobs. The
political boss became an institu-
tion in American politics, but the real
bosses were the economic
or business interests which stood behind
him with the power to
buy and sell. Business and political
interests throughout state
and nation united to protect their
economic privileges.
The history of the civic reform movement
in Ohio is illus-
trative of the movement throughout the
country. We are not
concerned with the agitations for moral
reform which were led by
ministers and "pornographic vice
commissions" and the "Anti-
Other-Folks' Enjoyment League," as
Whitlock described them.
Rather our attention is directed at the
group of leaders who saw
in the economic order the cause for the
unhappiness and sordid-
ness of men's lives, and who hoped to
contribute to the ameliora-
tion of conditions by political action.
In Ohio, by the turn of the
century, industrialism had reached a new
high. The names of
REFORM MOVEMENT IN OHIO 49
Mark Hanna and Joseph B. Foraker,
Republicans, and Calvin S.
Brice and Henry B. Payne, Democrats, are
representative of the
power of corporate wealth in the
governments of Ohio and the
nation. Bossism ruled the cities. Hanna
was one business man
who went directly into politics to
protect his interests. When his
machine lost control in Cleveland, it
was replaced by another under
Robert E. McKisson who boodled and
grafted into power.
Hanna's local influence slipped partly
because of his interest in
the larger field of state and national
politics. In Cincinnati was
a boss of great strength, George B. Cox.
Democratic dispenser of
political graft in Cincinnati was John
R. McLean, who at times
joined hands with Cox to control the
city. Toledo was represented
by George P. Waldorf, Collector of
Internal Revenue, and his
satellite and successor as chief boss,
Walter F. Brown, later Post-
master General under Hoover.
Through manipulation of the legislature,
the corruption of
city councils, and the control of
municipal elections special privi-
leges in the form of contracts or
franchises for public utilities were
granted without restrictions to private
companies, and reforms in
municipal administration were kept at a
minimum. Ohio was
ruled by business, by bankers,
railroads, and public utility com-
panies, who, through their agents, the
bosses, organized machines
and bribed or blackmailed to protect
their special privileges.
When, in 1897, Samuel M. Jones was
elected mayor of
Toledo, the first great threat to boss
control appeared on Ohio's
political horizon. Jones, a wealthy
manufacturer of equipment for
drilling oil wells, was moved not only
by the work of Mayor Ha-
zen S. Pingree of Detroit, but by the
noted social philosophers and
reformers of his day. Around him he
gathered a coterie of fol-
lowers, of whom Brand Whitlock was his
closest friend, to wage
battle against the Brown machine and to
make Toledo into a
beautiful and happy city. Jones was
re-elected three times by
large majorities, in spite of the
organized opposition to him of
the Chamber of Commerce, the business
and industrial interests,
and the preachers of the churches. At
Jones' death, while in
office in 1904, the spirit of his
administration was carried on by
50
OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
the Independents who elected Brand
Whitlock mayor in 1905, and
captured all other political offices of
the city and Lucas County.
In Cleveland, meanwhile, a similar group
came into power.
Here Tom L. Johnson, a friend and
disciple of Henry George, was
elected mayor on the Democratic ticket.
As in Jones' first elec-
tion, the business interests were rather
friendly than otherwise.
Johnson had been a steel magnate and the
owner of street rail-
way systems. In fact, during Pingree's
fight against special privi-
lege in Detroit, Tom Johnson's street
railway was the object of
his campaign. Johnson had acquired great
wealth as a result of
his manipulations in the business world.
But, like Jones, his
mind had already turned against the
philosophy of the business
man, and had been directed toward the
humanitarianism of eco-
nomic democracy. Whereas Jones was
steeped in the literature of
the social philosophers, Johnson was
guided chiefly by the words
of only one, Henry George. Both men,
however, were motivated
by the union of their experience with
deep human sympathies.
It took only the exciting tones of
humanitarian philosophers to
awaken the feeling of the brotherhood of
mankind within their
breasts. The remarkable reception of
their program by the com-
mon men of Toledo and Cleveland offered
encouragement to carry
on. Another factor which looms large in
the explanation of their
perseverance was the association of
compatible and kindred souls.
Jones and Johnson each surrounded
himself with young men,
students of government, of social and
political philosophy, and of
literature. Whitlock, a novelist in his
own right, introduced Jones
to many of the classics, especially the
writings of the Russians.
A little cult of men with literary
interests centered at the mayor's
office. In addition to Whitlock, there
were Perry Knapp, chief
of police under Jones and Whitlock, and
Dr. H. A. Tobey, the
famous superintendent of the Toledo
State Hospital for the In-
sane, and the man who discovered in a
Negro elevator boy in Day-
ton the poet, Paul Laurence Dunbar.
These men studied Whit-
man with avidity; he became a sort of
patron saint for them
in their strivings for democracy. In
Cleveland, Newton D. Baker
served Tom Johnson in much the same
capacity as Whitlock
REFORM MOVEMENT IN OHIO 51
served Jones, as legal advisor,
confidant, teacher, satellite, and
successor. Johnson had other men of
great ability around him,
too, including Peter Witt, Frederick C.
Howe, Edward W. Bemis,
Harris R. Cooley, and the Golden Rule
Police Chief, Fred Kohler.
These groups constantly intermingled,
visited back and forth,
campaigned for one another, supported
legislation together before
the General Assembly and carried on
correspondence. Their
program and their personalities
attracted other progressive thinkers
from all over the country. Lincoln
Steffens became a close friend,
and heralded the administrations of
Jones and Johnson as the best
city governments in the nation. Clarence
Darrow visited often,
and Ben Lindsey and Louis F. Post were
frequent correspondents.
Among others who knew and visited the
striking cities were George
and Lloyd, Jane Addams, Washington
Gladden, Josiah Strong,
Robert Ingersoll, Herbert N. Casson,
Lyman Abbott and George
Davis Herron. There were others, even
including Tolstoy who
carried on a considerable correspondence
with Jones. E. W.
Scripps, of the Scripps-McRae chain of
newspapers, was attracted
by the new voices. Through the efforts
of Negley D. Cochran,
editor of the News-Bee and later
editor-in-chief of the chain, the
Scripps papers threw their active
support to the reformers. Prob-
ably Cochran and these papers were among
the strongest forces
which succeeded in keeping the movement
going. Caspar Yost,
George Creel, Mark Sullivan and Samuel
Hopkins Adams helped
publicize the movement. In the warm
atmosphere of encouraging
association, these civic reformers
planned their attack on special
privilege, drew up programs for better
city governments, and
countered the blows of defeat or delay.
Both Jones and Johnson were influenced
in city planning by
European models, the former especially
by Paris and the latter
by German cities. Their programs
envisioned a semi-socialist city.
They believed the city should own and
operate all public utilities.
Toward this end Jones and Whitlock in
Toledo, and Johnson in
Cleveland, waged bitter campaigns
against the extension of fran-
chises, especially to the street railway
companies. These battles
involved a struggle with the regular
political parties and their
52
OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
bosses, for the parties were controlled
by the utilities and their
friends. Jones died in the fight, and
the day after his death the
railway officials issued a letter
announcing the golden opportunity
to invest in the company's stock.
Johnson was broken by ill health
in the fight, and died after four terms
as mayor, somewhat disil-
lusioned. Whitlock and Baker carried the
battle to the people,
and won a provision in the new State
Constitution of 1912 per-
mitting cities the right to own their
public utilities.
But more still was contemplated. The
leaders of the move-
ment believed the city should make life
enjoyable with parks and
playgrounds, free concert halls,
bath-houses, swimming pools,
skating rinks, museums and art
galleries. The parks and civic
centers program of Toledo and Cleveland
originated under Jones
and Johnson. Scientific schools and
municipal universities were
on their program, too. These men were
concerned more with
society's responsibilities to its
members than they were with the
individual's obligations or his personal
morality. They saw the
city and state in position to guarantee
economic security and a
right to work on public projects when
private employment was
scarce. The need for slum and tenement
clearance could be met
by giving to the unemployed the job of
developing municipal
housing areas. Toledo and Cleveland
placed their police and fire
departments under civil service, and
shortened hours and raised
wages for city employees. In both cities
the police were trans-
formed into service organizations, and
their clubs were taken away.
Jones introduced the free kindergarten
into the public school sys-
tem and organized the movement for
playgrounds and vocational
education. Johnson initiated similar
reforms in Cleveland, among
the outstanding contributions being the
Cooley Farms for the care
of the aged, the ill and those sentenced
for crimes, including the
Boys' Home for juvenile cases.
Such reforms taxed the patience of the
privileged groups, for
they set up precedents of collective
responsibility for social welfare
and they presented the threat of
increased taxes. They opposed
the reformers violently. Meanwhile, the
civic leaders were seeking
reforms which were fundamental to
economic democracy. They
REFORM MOVEMENT IN OHIO 53
were pressing for the right of a
community to protect itself from
the ravages of entrenched interests, for
the right of a municipality
to govern itself, regulate its
utilities, and tax its property and
wealth. Municipal government in Ohio was
frustrated by legisla-
tive controls. Jones tested these
controls, and won before the
Ohio Supreme Court, forcing an entire
revision of the municipal
code. But self-government of cities was
to be denied until liberal
forces, led by Whitlock and Baker, wrote
provisions for municipal
self-government into the Constitutional
Amendments of 1912. The
attempts to force re-evaluation for
taxation purposes of corpora-
tions and especially utilities which had
realized increased wealth
through the community met virulent
protests. For taxation pur-
poses the evaluation was low; for profit
rationalizations the value
was high. In Toledo in 1904, the railway
and light company held
properties valued at about $5,000,000.
The total capitalization,
however, in stocks and bonds was
$29,500,000. High fares and
low taxes were a necessity to pay
dividends on the watered stock.
In order to protect its interest the
company entered politics, placed
its own men in office, and when Jones
came in, tried to undermine
his efforts by bribery of public
officials.
That story is not new. Mark Hanna bought
where he could
not otherwise win his case. Once he
remarked, in distinguishing
himself from Foraker: "The
difference between us is that I buy
and Foraker sells." When the
movement of Jones in Toledo
appeared to him to threaten the
interests, Hanna sent money to
Brown to buy up Jones' lieutenants. The
state political machines
of Hanna, Brown, Foraker and Cox were
too strong for success
of the reform movements in Toledo and
Cleveland. Jones, there-
fore, ran for governor as an Independent
in 1899, and Johnson ran
as the Democratic candidate in 1903.
Both men were defeated,
but they had succeeded in presenting to
the people of Ohio the
programs for which they were fighting in
their respective cities.
Among their greatest contributions to
municipal government was
making the people of their cities
conscious of politics. Toledo and
Cleveland became during this time arenas
of political debate. The
gubernatorial campaigns of Jones and
Johnson had the effect of
carrying the debate to the whole State.
54
OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
To a considerable extent the reform
movement in Ohio at the
turn of the century was the movement of
its two original leaders.
After their deaths, Whitlock and Baker
carried on in the names
of Jones and Johnson respectively. It was their words which
were quoted by their successors, and it
was their programs which
their successors sought to effect in
their respective cities. It was
left to the young men to win most of the
reforms which Jones
and Johnson had sought. They followed
Johnson into the Demo-
cratic fold, and pressed a reform
platform upon that party. The
election of Governor Judson Harmon in 1908 marked the
real
beginnings of opposition to Republican
control of Ohio politics.
Under him the State Tax Commission was
created, the administra-
tion of State penal and benevolent
institutions was reorganized and
centralized, the regulation of public
utilities was placed in the
hands of a Public Service Commission, a
Workmen's Compensa-
tion act was passed, and a law to
regulate elections was enacted.
Pressure from the Ohio civic reformers
and the people won a
series of amendments to Ohio's
Constitution in 1912. Reverend
Herbert Bigelow of Cincinnati, a friend
of the Toledo-Cleveland
group and a single-taxer, was made
president of the convention.
Out of the convention came provisions
for municipal home rule,
written by Whitlock and Baker, for the
initiative and referendum,
for a general increase in the power of
the State executive, and
for enlargement of the power of the
legislature to deal with capital
and labor. The three terms of Governor
James M. Cox stand out
in Ohio's history as the period of
greatest legislation to extend
economic democracy to the people. Rights
and guarantees were
extended to labor, penal reforms were
adopted, public utilities
and banks were brought under increased
governmental control, a
social security program was initiated,
the health administration of
the State was reorganized, a civil
service system was erected, the
tax system was rejuvenated and Ohio's
educational system was
reorganized and greatly expanded:
Many of the hopes of Jones and Johnson
had been realized,
though inequalities still existed in the
economic and political order,
inequalities which they felt could only
be eliminated through a col-
lective or socialistic economy. The
success of the progressive
REFORM MOVEMENT IN OHIO 55
program in the Constitutional Convention
and in the subsequent
Cox administrations and the pressures of
the war brought the
Toledo-Cleveland reform movement to an
end. Whitlock and
Baker graduated to the larger field of
public service, the national
government. With these effective front
men gone, and in the
face of popular reaction which followed
the war, the reform
movement lost its strength and its
distinctiveness. It seems fair
to pass this judgment: That it was
worthwhile, that much of its
program has been effected, that the
people have become more
conscious of their political rights and
their collective power.
Although there have been and may be
temporary set-backs and
reactions to the movement for economic
democracy, Ohio's people
have had an experience upon which to
build when their patience is
worn and their acquiescence ends.
THE REFORM MOVEMENT IN OHIO AT THE TURN
OF THE CENTURY
By JAMES H. RODABAUGH*
The end of the nineteenth century, in a
very real sense,
sounded the knell of the frontier or
pioneer period of American
development, and opened the doors upon a
new era in which in-
dustrialization and its concomitant
social and economic reorgani-
zation and readjustments and political
bewilderment were the
dominant forces. Frederick Jackson
Turner opened his remark-
ably perceptive presidential address
before the American His-
torical Association in 191O with these
words: "The transforma-
tions through which the United States is
passing in our own day
are so profound, so far-reaching, that
it is hardly an exaggeration
to say that we are witnessing the birth
of a new nation in
America."
It is not necessary here to recall the
revolution in the economic
and social structure of this country
which followed the Civil War.
Stimulated by the war itself, industry
began its expansion. Rein-
forced by the rationalizations of
laissez faire and frontier indi-
vidualism, industrial capital proceeded
to build its empire. Wealth
increased, industrial production
skyrocketed, and new inventions
added to the range of life. But these
were counterbalanced by
poverty and class conflict. The control
of the nation's wealth and
production rapidly concentrated in the
hands of a relatively small
proportion of the population. The other
side of the picture is a
story of pauperism and slums, of disease
and crime, of sordid-
ness and unhappiness among the millions
who crowded into the
cities.
Technical advances came too rapidly and
wealth skyrocketed
too suddenly for our political
institutions, which were not ad-
vanced in tempo with the changes of
industrialization. In the
* This paper was read at the
Mississippi Valley Historical Association meeting,
April 21, 1944, at St. Louis, Missouri.
(46)