At the turn of the twentieth century, investigative journalism exposed what many saw as glaring inequalities in industrializing America. In The Shame of the Cities, journalist Lincoln Steffens wrote about the need for significant political reform in the city of Philadelphia. Machine bosses such as New York City’s George Washington Plunkitt, however, challenged Steffens’s observations about the role of political machines in urban government, presenting themselves as much more effective representatives of the people’s interests than the reformers.
| 18.4 | Lincoln Steffens | The Shame of the Cities, 1904 |
The honest citizens of Philadelphia have no more rights at the polls than the [N]egroes down South. Nor do they fight very hard for this basic privilege. You can arouse their Republican ire by talking about the black Republican votes lost in the Southern States by white Democratic intimidation, but if you remind the average Philadelphian that he is in the same position, he will look startled, then say, “That’s so, that’s literally true, only I never thought of it in just that way.” And it is literally true.
The machine controls the whole process of voting, and practices fraud at every stage. The assessor’s list is the voting list, and the assessor is the machine’s man. . . . The assessor pads the list with the names of dead dogs, children, and non-existent persons. One newspaper printed the picture of a dog, another that of a little four-year-old [N]egro boy, down on such a list.
Source: Lincoln Steffens, The Shame of the Cities (New York: McClure, Phillips, 1904), 198–99.
| 18.5 | George Washington Plunkitt | Confessions of a Political Boss, 1905 |
If a family is burned out I don’t ask whether they are Republicans or Democrats, and I don’t refer them to the Charity Organization Society, which would investigate their case in a month or two and decide they were worthy of help about the time they are dead from starvation. I just get quarters for them, buy clothes for them if their clothes were burned up, and fix them up till they get things runnin’ again. It’s philanthropy, but it’s politics, too—mighty good politics. Who can tell how many votes one of these fires bring me? The poor are the most grateful people in the world, and, let me tell you, they have more friends in their neighborhoods than the rich have in theirs. . . .
I’ve been reading a book by Lincoln Steffens on The Shame of the Cities. Steffens means well but, like all reformers, he don’t know how to make distinctions. He can’t see no difference between honest graft and dishonest graft, and, consequent, he gets things all mixed up. There’s the biggest kind of difference between political looters and politicians who make a fortune out of politics by keepin’ their eyes wide open. The looter goes in for himself alone without considerin’ his organization or his city. The politician looks after his own interests, the organization’s interests, and the city’s interests all at the same time.
Source: William L. Riordan, Plunkitt of Tammany Hall (New York: E. P. Dutton, 1963), 28–29.
Interpret the Evidence
Put It in Context