The People’s Capital: The Politics of Popular Wealth in the Gilded Age By Robert Gabriel Nelson A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Robin Einhorn, Chair Professor Caitlin Rosenthal Professor David Henkin Professor Chrisopher Tomlins Spring 2019 1 Abstract The People’s Capital: The Politics of Popular Wealth in the Gilded Age by Robert Gabriel Nelson Doctor of Philosophy in History University of California, Berkeley Professor Robin Einhorn, Chair The proliferation of financial practices and institutions throughout the mass of American society throughout the late nineteenth and early twentieth century produced a wide range of social effects. From changing discourses about racial progress and equality to aspirations for integrating rebellious workers into a system of financial-industrial capitalism, anxieties about financial panics to the possibilities of worker-owned cooperatives, popular engagement with the financial apparatus became the very stuff of American life. This dissertation looks at a wide range of primary sources— political pamphlets, bank statements, cooperative prospectuses, reform newspapers, trade journals, novels, and congressional testimony—to link changes in the form and nature of popular wealth to the development of mass politics. As the scattered but substantial wealth of the American working classes began to congeal in institutional forms, a wide variety of historical actors struggled over what to do with the people’s capital. i Acknowledgments As is the case with all dissertations, “The People’s Capital” reflects the hard work, attention, and dedication of many individuals. Over these past seven years, I have learned a great deal from my dissertation committee, mentors, and peers alike. They have advised me on sources, given me guidance in terms of organizational structure, and have always been ready to offer intellectual challenge and critique when it came to mapping out the scholarly terrain that this dissertation seeks to explore. The collective nature of academic tasks is among the least acknowledged but most fundamental truths of intellectual life. The strengths of this dissertation emerge from such mentorship and guidance, while the remaining imperfections are certainly my own. My dissertation committee has been a fantastic resource for me throughout the process of writing the dissertation, and even before. From Robin Einhorn, I have learned what it meant to be an engaged scholar and to take my role as an educator seriously. Someone who approached the task of giving lectures to 600 undergraduates in a survey course with as much poise, seriousness, and passion as presenting research findings at a conference or writing field-defining books. Her zeal for lecturing and debating set a fire off in my brain, and has carried me to where I am today. Caitlin Rosenthal has taught me what close personal mentorship looks like, and has helped me maintain the balance between intellectual seriousness and a perspective on the importance of life outside the academy. She has spent many hours reading, editing, and talking with me about what this dissertation is and what I wanted it to be. Helping her develop a course syllabus for the History of American Capitalism gave me a sense of ownership over my own teaching that has inspired me throughout my graduate career. David Henkin has modeled serious and compassionate intellectual inquiry from my first year in graduate school, combining unrivalled seminar-facilitation skills with a methodical and thoughtful approach to the process of editing. His intellectual hunger is omnivorous, and seems to never end. And from Christopher Tomlins, I have learned to more seriously confront the role of theory in the study of history, as well as how to combine intellectual sophistication with humor and directness. While not directly involved in the writing of this dissertation, there are other Berkeley faculty that I would like to acknowledge for their friendship, mentorship, and boundless intellectual energy. James Vernon was steadfast in his support for my intellectual and political development, his office always open for a conversation about history, politics, or sports. Brian DeLay was instrumental in helping me my research project on the history of the Freedman’s Bank, and the rigor with which he pursues his own research inspires his own students to push themselves further. Stephanie Jones- Rogers allowed me to audit her writing seminar in order to stitch that research on the Freedman’s Bank into what became the third chapter of this dissertation. While we only overlapped at Berkeley for a year or two, her intellectual generosity and enthusiasm for that chapter is reflected in its strengths. A hearty thank-you is also warranted to Rebecca McLennan, Mark Brilliant, and Waldo Martin for helping to make the US history field such a rich intellectual resource at Berkeley. One final faculty acknowledgement is for Seth Rockman, whose class on nineteenth-century American history rocked my world as an undergraduate, and whose advice and guidance were crucial for helping me to develop myself intellectually at an important age. The bedrock of intellectual, political, and social life for history graduate students at Berkeley are, well, other graduate students. They make this endeavor worth doing. I would like to extend a special acknowledgement to my own cohort of U.S. historians: Aaron Hall, Natalie Novoa, Camilo Lund-Montano, Ivana Mirkovic, Yana Skorobogatov. I have learned so much from your friendship and our endless conversations. The same goes for Sheer Ganor, Anthony Gregory, Sophie Fitzmaurice, Sam Wetherell, Danny Kelly, Joey Kellner, Ari Edmundson, Derek O’Leary, Joel Pattison, Sebastian Peel, Grace Goudiss, Lois Rosson, Gene Zubovich, and many more. For any of ii those who I’ve failed to name, it simply reflects the limits of my own memory in trying to think through the many faces who have shaped my experience while writing this dissertation. As a materialist, it also behooves me to acknowledge the funding that has allowed me to complete this dissertation. Thank you to the History Department, the Graduate Division, and the American Cultures Engaged Scholarship program at UC Berkeley for your ongoing support, thank you to the Business History Conference for helping to fund my travel and scholarship, and thank you to the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the Wisconsin Historical society for your funding, hospitality, and archival resources that have allowed me to research and write this dissertation. Finally, I owe a huge debt of gratitude to my family. To Marge, Sue, Zvi, Tali, Will, Mike, Nina, Diana, Russ, and Josh— I am lucky to have a group of extended kin like you in my corner. To my mom and dad, Leslie and David, you have taught me how to love reading, learning, and debating. First and foremost, however, you have taught me how important it is to be a mensch. You’ve seen this project from the beginning, and your unending generosity, curiosity, energy, and love are what has powered me through. To my brother, Ben—I am so proud to be your brother, navigating this world together, and knowing that we’ve got each others’ backs through everything. Your perspective is unique and your insights into what’s important in life are bracing and always welcome. Last but certainly not least, Megan Svoboda, without whom this project and my life would look a whole lot different. Perhaps more than any other person, you’ve gotten to see and experience what it’s been like for me to carry out this thing to its completion. Your intellectual and political vitality, your warm support, your welcome perspective when I’m getting too far in the weeds, and your occasional but crucial interventions have made this project what it is. I cannot imagine life— political, personal, intellectual—with anyone else. You are my inspiration, my best friend, and my partner on life’s big adventure. iii Table of Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………………………….... 1 The People’s Capital Chapter 1 Saving the People’s Capital………………………………………………………………………20 Chapter 2 Cooperative Commonwealths…………………………………………………………………... 72 Chapter 3 Black Capital and the Politics of Freedom……………………………………………………… 113 Chapter 4 The Politics of Panic…………………………………………………………………………… 161 Epilogue………………………………………………………………………………………. 218 Bibliography ………………………………………………………………………………….. 227 1 Introduction: The People’s Capital During the latter half of the nineteenth century and the first decade of the twentieth, increasing numbers of ordinary Americans began directly participating in formal financial institutions for the first time and at a large scale. They deposited their money in savings banks, purchased insurance policies, took on mortgages for homes and farmland, started agricultural cooperatives, joined labor-based benefit societies, and learned about financial practices in public schools. In the years between the Civil War and the First World War, a wide range of Americans, from bankers and farmers to labor agitators and preachers, came to view the collective financial resources of the American working classes as a source of immense political, economic, and cultural power. And they saw the institutions that aggregated those resources as potential mechanisms to alleviate, alter, or challenge the political-economic dynamics of industrial capitalism. “The People’s Capital”