# U. S. Senate Speeches and Remarks of Carl Schurz/Washington International Exhibition

“The Senate resumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the consideration of the bill (S. 291) to encourage and promote the international industrial exhibition to be held in Washington City in the year 1871, ...” — Journal of the Senate of the United States of America, 41st Congress, 2nd Session (February 18, 1870), p. 270. The text of the speech is from The Congressional Globe, 41st Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 1398-1400.
WASHINGTON INTERNATIONAL EXHIBITION.
Mr. SCHURZ. Mr. President, I am rather surprised to hear the Senator from Ohio [Mr. Sherman] speak of an international exposition as a mere show that may be planned and set on foot on the spur of the moment. Why, sir, an international exhibition is one of the most important things which a nation can undertake. Here we are asked to set the whole machinery of our diplomatic representation in motion, for the purpose of inviting the Governments and the nations of the world to come to the United States and look at us. Here we promise them to show them the very best we have. And the Senator from Ohio tells us that it is nothing but a mere show, to be held for the purpose of gratifying some persons here in the city of Washington. Did he never read the history of European exhibitions, never hear of the gigantic preparations that were made by European Governments for the purpose of rendering those enterprises successful?
Mr. SHERMAN. I have attended some of them.
Mr. SCHURZ. Then he must certainly have come to the conclusion that it is not a mere circus, which passes in at one end of a city and passes out at the other, but that it is looked upon as one of the most momentous enterprises that a nation can possibly undertake. We are putting on exhibition not only the city of Washington; we put on exhibition all the United States have to show; we virtually put on exhibition the American people; and certainly that is a matter worthy of very serious consideration.
I am opposed to this bill for two reasons: first, because I am so good a friend of the people of Washington as to feel a desire to protect them against themselves; and secondly, because I want to protect the people of the United States against an imprudent scheme gotten up in this city.
It has frequently been said, and I am afraid justly so, that the people of the District of Columbia have been neglected by Congress; that they have been badly treated; but I am sure that the passage of this bill would inflict much worse treatment upon the people of Washington than anything we have done yet, for it would induce them to embark a portion of their fortunes in an undertaking which could hardly fail to result disastrously to them.
Let us consider for a moment what an international exhibition means. Look at Europe. There four international exhibitions have been held, and each time one of the greatest and most populous capitals of that part of the earth was selected for that purpose. They were held in London and in Paris. Now, it is said that Washington is as good a capital as London and Paris. To be sure it is the seat of Government. But will you compare the places for a moment?
First, London and Paris are not only the seats of Government of England and of France, but they are at the same time the greatest centers of population in Europe. Within fifteen hours' travel of either of those two cities there lives as large a population as we have within the boundaries of the United States, and more. At the same time the resident population of London and Paris is as great as the resident population of some of the largest States of this Union.
Secondly, London and Paris are the greatest centers of wealth, wealth readily devoting itself to just such enterprises as international exhibitions.
Thirdly, London and Paris are the greatest centers of communication there. They are centers of the best and most carefully organized railway systems of the world.
Fourthly, London and Paris are great centers of trade, and mark you what I say, if you want to make your international exhibition successful you must hold it where you not only can
bring together the products of the industries of the world, but where there is also a good market with a fair prospect of selling them. If you cannot do that, people will not be inclined to carry them there, for they do not contribute them merely for the purpose of exhibition, but, to a great extent also, for the purpose of disposing of them.
Finally, London and Paris are the greatest centers of all varieties of attractions. Thousands and thousands of people went there during those exhibitions, not for the purpose merely of looking at the exhibitions themselves, but for the purpose of seeing those cities.
Now, let us see what the result of these exhibitions has been, and on this point I have collated a few statistical facts.
There was, first, the London exposition of 1851. The total capital contributed for carrying on that enterprise amounted to £400,000, or $2,000,000 in gold. The profits realized were £85,000, exclusive of the amount realized from the sale of the building. But it must not be forgotten that the first London exhibition was carried on upon a much more economical footing than ever an exhibition has been held since, and at the same time it had the charm of novelty so as to attract people from far and near to an extraordinary degree.
The second exhibition was held in Paris in 1855. The total outlay was 23,000,000 francs or $4,600,000 in gold. The total income was 3,000,000 francs; so that the loss amounted to 20,000,000 francs, or $4,000,000 in gold, exclusive of the fine exposition building which was left as a monument of the great fair.
The third was the London exhibition of 1862. A charter of incorporation was issued to royal commissioners, Thomas Baring being one of the members. Under these auspices a guarantee fund of £455,000, or $2,275,000, in gold was formed and was signed by one hundred and fifteen persons. Upon the security of their deed the Bank of England advanced the money for the erection of the building and for making the necessary preparations for the exhibition itself. The entire amount received by the royal commissioners during the exhibition from all sources was £448,631, or $2,243,155, in gold. The expenses of the commissioners would have been £460,000, or $2,300,000, in gold, but the contractors for the building canceled the amount of £11,000 due them in order to enable the commissioners to square up their accounts.
Therefore, the exhibition of 1862 cost almost exactly what it produced. No demand had to be made on the guarantee fund on the one hand, and on the other hand the exhibition, with all the advantages of precedent, experience, and locality, left the commissioners without any part of the building in which the exhibition had been held and without any other property arising from it, and also without any cash balance. The building reverted to the contractors, the funds at disposal being exhausted by the sum agreed upon for a mere rent of the palace.
Finally, there was the Paris exhibition of 1867. It was undertaken by the Government with outside assistance. Twenty-four million francs, $4,600,000 in gold, were required to start the enterprise. Of this the Government, cautioned by the experience of 1855, gave only 6,000,000 francs; another 6,000,000 francs was contributed by the city of Paris, and the remaining 12,000,000 francs were subscribed by private individuals under the condition that they be reimbursed from the first receipts. The balance-sheet has been kept most studiously private, but it is certain that neither Government nor city ever expected to receive one farthing in return after the colossal building, which, exclusive of the necessary grading, had cost 10,000,000 francs, or $2,000,000 in gold, was sold for 1,500,000 francs at public auction.
These are the four European exhibitions, of which we perceive that only one, the first one, was a financial success. That first one
was most economically conducted, and having the charm of novelty, it enjoyed greater advantages than ever an exhibition enjoyed after that.
Now, compare the advantages of Paris and London, in spite of which no financial success could be achieved, except in 1851, with those of Washington. What is the population of this city? To be sure, it is very respectable and estimable; there are some families here living upon independent fortunes; but most of the population consists of boarding-house keepers, hotel proprietors, a small number of tradesmen, and the officers, clerks, and other employés of the Government — all, I repeat, very respectable people, to be sure; but certainly very inconsiderable in numbers, and nobody will assert that this population can contribute anything worth mentioning to the success of such a tremendous enterprise. It must be borne in mind that the success of an exhibition of this kind depends in a very great measure, perhaps mainly, upon the support it receives from the resident population and those living within easy reach.
I have seen some statements in Washington newspapers that they expect five million people to visit the city of Washington during this contemplated exhibition. Now, sir, what do you think was the number of people that came from a distance to see the exhibition of 1867 in Paris? The number of travelers arriving in Paris during the exhibition, in the second and third-class carriages of the railroad lines leading into that city, was four hundred and forty thousand. It is well known that in Europe people do not travel as generally first-class as they do here; but assuming that the number of first-class passengers was about half that conveyed by the other classes, and this estimate is certainly too high, it would give a total of six hundred and sixty thousand people who arrived in Paris from a distance to view the great international spectacle, and yet there are persons here so extravagantly sanguine as to speak of five million people about to congregate here and that, too, in a country infinitely less densely inhabited, and with traveling facilities infinitely inferior.
It is an established fact, then, that the success of an exhibition of this kind rests in a very great measure, if not mainly, upon the resident population, and not upon those who come from abroad. And what are the chances of the world's fair at Washington in this respect?
Secondly, compare Washington with London and Paris as to accumulated wealth. I do not think it necessary to say a single word about that.
Thirdly, as to its being a center of communications. When we speak of our railroad system in Washington we say “the railroad,” and everybody knows what we mean; when we speak of the depot we say “the depot,” and everybody understands us to mean that one place where the omnibuses congregate three or four times a day. These are the communications of Washington, and I think I need not say another word about them.
Now, as to trade and industry. I wish gentlemen to show me a single city in the United States of the size of Washington, or even half as large, where there is less of trade and industry than there is here; where there is less chance for those who come to exhibit their goods, the products of their industry, to sell them, than there is in this out-of-the-way corner. I do not want to disparage Washington; but the fact is of importance and must not be lost sight of. Not to speak of New York or Philadelphia, let us take Baltimore, Boston, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Pittsburg, Chicago, or St. Louis, there is not a single city of any pretensions on this continent which, in that respect, would not be vastly preferable to Washington for holding an international exhibition.
Now, as to other attractions. It is true we have very fine Government buildings; it is true we have historical associations, and those historical associations may now and then induce
a sentimental traveler to come here to see the house where Congress holds its session, or to see the place where President Lincoln was assassinated, and so on; but do you think that they will insure the success of an international exhibition? Do you think you can fill the pockets of those who invest their money in such a gigantic enterprise by referring them to tourists who run after “historical associations?”
Mr. President, it seems to me that while London and Paris united all the advantages that possibly can be united to make an international exhibition a success, in Washington you do not find a single one of them. People speak of contributing $2,000,000 toward this enterprise. Why, sir, there is no amount of money that can possibly be collected which would make an international exhibition a success here, for this place lacks all the advantages which are absolutely required to save such a tremendous undertaking from disastrous failure.
The cost of exhibitions is a great deal larger than it was when they were first attempted. People will no longer be satisfied with the somewhat modest arrangements of 1851, in London. At the international exhibition of Paris, in 1867, the area of ground covered by a glass roof was forty times as large as this national Capitol. I have already stated the cost of the structure; it cost 10,000,000 francs, or $2,000,000 in gold. And now I wish you to observe that at Paris wages are paid at the rate of six francs, or $1 20 in gold a day; while here you would have to pay every workman employed in erecting such a structure at least $2 50, if not $3 50 a day. In France all the material required for such a building cost at least fifty per cent. less than it would cost here. And yet people speak, as of something grand, of $2,000,000 to get up here an exhibition to compete with the great world's fairs of Europe. And it must do that, if it is to do credit and honor to this nation at all. Is it not what the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Sumner] would call a “monstrous preposterosity?”
Now, sir, if there is anything certain it is that this company, which asks for incorporation and for the countenance of the American Government, would break down before finishing the enterprise, and then, I ask you, who would have to pay the cost? It will not do to say that no appropriation is now asked for. The Senator from Ohio indeed tells us that in fact the twelfth section of this bill, which makes it the duty of the Secretary of State to put himself in communication with all the Governments of the world, does not mean much, and we can strike it out. Is this so? If we strike out this and the other provision which places the custom-houses of the country at the disposal of the International Exposition Company, will not the whole international scheme fall to the ground?
But what if we leave it in? Does not the twelfth section virtually take the enterprise out of the hands of private persons to make it a great national business? Here is the Secretary of State, the representative of our foreign policy, who is to instruct all our diplomatic and consular agents to put themselves in communication with all foreign Governments, to tell them that we are to hold a great international exhibition of the industries of the world here at the seat of the national Government, and that he in the name of the American people — for such is virtually the intent — invites the nations of the world to come and be represented here; and still the Senator speaks of it as a private enterprise! Certainly, as soon as we adopt a programme like this we involve the credit, we involve the honor of the American people in the undertaking; and if it threatens to become a failure for want of means, who will have to step in to save it?
I repeat, the failure of the scheme is, as I look upon it, absolutely inevitable, for there is not one of the conditions of success to be found
here. It seems to me the American people cannot afford to engage in such an attempt without at least a reasonable chance of making it creditable to the nation. Have we not a warning precedent before us? We have once cast a shadow upon the American name by an experiment of this kind. You remember, not without shame, the New York affair of years ago. Can we afford to repeat the experiment under circumstances perhaps still less favorable? Even if we desire to gratify some very honorable and estimable gentlemen in this city, can we as American legislators afford to do so at such a risk of sacrificing the national honor?
I certainly do not bear any ill-will to the people of the city of Washington. On the contrary, I am their friend, and because I am their true friend I want to keep them out of this trouble.
The trades-people of this city may indulge in the illusion that they will realize great profits from the strangers who come here to attend this international exhibition. Why, sir, it is the experience of the trades-people of Paris that during the international exhibition there they sold far less than they did before its commencement and after its close, and for a very simple reason. People instead of going to the stores to buy what they desired went to the international exhibition, and then had the gratifying feeling that they had taken the ornaments they intended to put upon their persons or into their houses from the great industrial palace which was the admiration of the world. Therefore, instead of offering a chance of gain to the trades-people of Washington, the exhibition would simply be to their disadvantage.
The Senator from Ohio [Mr. Thurman] has already called our attention to the fact that the exhibition would run up rents, to the great embarrassment of people in moderate circumstances, and thus produce great distress. I do not know what Senator it was who replied that it would not run up rents because but few people would come here. Well, if that is so, if but few people come here, where is then the success of your international exhibition, for there are certainly not people enough resident here to make it a success? Of course, the mere anticipation of a numerous congregation of visitors will run up rents, and under this increase of rents all those will keenly suffer who live upon a small salary, eking out a very scanty existence now.
There are two classes of people whom possibly the international exhibition will benefit. These are the proprietors of hotels and the boarding-house keepers. But now I ask you, as American Senators, whether you are ready to sacrifice, or even jeopardize the honor of the nation for the purpose of gratifying the boarding-house keepers and hotel proprietors of the city of Washington, who, perhaps, of all the people here have the least claim on the national gratitude?
I said that I was advocating the indefinite postponement of the bill because I am a real friend of the people of Washington. I want to keep them out of a grievous loss. I do not hesitate to predict that every dollar invested in such an enterprise here will be a dollar sunk. Certainly they have not millions to spare for nothing, and if we have an opportunity to prevent them from throwing money to the winds, it is an act of true friendship to improve it.
I congratulate the people of Washington upon the spirit of enterprise of which they have given evidence on this occasion, but it appears to me they can employ it for a much better purpose. It was, I believe, the Senator from Nevada [Mr. Nye] who alluded to the great water-power in the neighborhood of this city. Certainly, there it is. Let those who now attempt to undertake this exhibition contribute their two millions to improve that water-power, and they will surely make a much better investment than by indulging in what the Senator from Ohio [Mr. Sherman] calls “the show.” Let them improve, let them develop all the great facilities they
have, let them build up the industries of the place, let them engage in enlarging their communications, let them employ their money for sensible and permanent purposes, and in the end they will have benefited themselves and their city far more than if, even against all reasonable expectation, they really succeeded in carrying this windy scheme through.
Exhibitions are certainly very good things in their way; but we have every reason to be careful. I am doubtful whether the present moment would be propitious for an international exhibition at any place in the United States. Let us watch for a favorable combination of circumstances. Let us see when and how we can have the whole people of the United States to contribute their energies toward making such an enterprise a success; but let us not, like children, play at world's fair. It is a serious business. I appeal to the Senate to refrain from involving the good name of the American people in an enterprise which is an imprudence in its very conception, and which, if attempted, will become a national shame in its results.