Advertisement

The History of Foundations in the United Kingdom and the United States

Philanthropic Foundations in Industrial Society
  • Martin Bulmer
Part of the Nonprofit and Civil Society Studies book series (NCSS)

Abstract

Writing as a child in his autograph book in 1888, Seebohm Rowntree, son of the British Quaker chocolate manufacturer, noted Oliver Wendell Holmes’s maxim: “Put not your trust in money, but your money in trust.” It was a prescient remark bearing the influence of his father, who a few years later established three trusts. The Philanthropic Foundation is a distinctive twentieth-century social institution that has played a central role in charitable and voluntary support for a range of educational, medical, and scientific activities, which are not commonly identified with the voluntary sector today. The twelve years between 1901 and 1913 witnessed the emergence of this new form of philanthropy. Starting with the Rockefeller Institute of Medical Research and the Carnegie Institution of Washington, in 1901, there followed the establishment of the General Education Board in 1902, the three charitable trusts established by Joseph Rowntree in Britain in 1904, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching in 1905, the Russell Sage Foundation in 1907, the Rockefeller Sanitary Commission in 1909, the Carnegie Corporation of New York in 1911, and the Rockefeller Foundation in 1913.

Keywords

Social Science Research Industrial Society Rockefeller Foundation Russell Sage Foundation Interwar Period 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Addams, J. (1902). Democracy and Social Ethics. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  2. Amove, R. F. (Ed.). (1980). Philanthropy and Cultural Imperialism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Berger, P. (1977). In praise of particularity: The concept of mediating structures. In P. Berger (Ed.), Facing Up to Modernity: Excursions in Society, Politics and Religion (pp. 130–141). New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  4. Booth, C. (1889-1903). Life and Labour of the People of London (17 vols.). London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  5. Bremner, R. H. (1988). American Philanthropy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Briggs, A. (1961). Social Thought and Social Action: A Study of the Work of Seebohm Rowntree 1871-1954. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  7. Briggs, A., & Macartney, A. (1984). Toynbee Hall: The First Hundred Years. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, E. R. (1979). Rockefeller Medicine Men: Medicine and Capitalism in America. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bulmer, M. (1980). The early institutional establishment of social science research: The Local Community Research Committee at the University of Chicago, 1923-1930. Minerva, 18(Spring), 51–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bulmer, M. (1981). Sociology and political science at Cambridge in the 1920’s: An opportunity missed and an opportunity taken. Cambridge Review, CII(2262), 156–159.Google Scholar
  11. Bulmer, M. (1984). Philanthropic foundations and the development of the social sciences in the early twentieth century: A reply to Donald Fisher. Sociology, 18(4), 572–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bulmer, M. (1987). The rise of the academic as expert. Minerva, 25(3), 362–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bulmer, M. (Ed.). (1987). Social Science Research and Government: Comparative Essays on Britain and the United States. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Bulmer, M., & Bulmer, J. (1981). Philanthropy and social science in the 1920’s: Beardsley Ruml and the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, 1922–1929. Minerva, 19(Autumn), 347–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bulmer, M., Bales, K., & Sklar, K. K. (Eds.). (1992). The Social Survey in Historical Perspective, 1880-1940. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Chambers, C. A. (1971). Paul U. Kellogg and “The Survey.” Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  17. Clark, R. W. (1972). A Biography of the Nuffield Foundation. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  18. Coing, H. (1981). Remarks on the history of foundations and their role in the promotion of learning. Minerva, 19(2), 271–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Critchlow, D. T. (1985). The Brookings Institution, 1916–1952: Expertise and the Public Interest in a Democratic Society. DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Davis, A. F. (1967). Spearheads for Reform: The Social Settlements and the Progressive Movement 1890-1914. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Du Bois, W. E. B. (1899). The Philadephia Negro: A Social Study. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  22. Fisher, D. (1978). The Rockefeller Foundation and the development of scientific medicine in Great Britain. Minerva, 16, 20–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fisher, D. (1984). Philanthropic foundations and the development of the social sciences: A response to Martin Bulmer. Sociology, 18(4), 580–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fisher, D. (1993). Fundamental Development of the Social Sciences: Rockefeller philanthropy and the United States Social Science Research Council. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  25. Flexner, A. (1930). Universities American, English, German. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Geiger, R. (1986). To Advance Knowledge: The Growth of American Research Universities in the Twentieth Century, 1900-1940. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Gerstein, D. R., Luce, R. D., Smelser, N.J., & Sperlich, S. (Eds.). (1988). The Behavioral and Social Sciences: Achievements and Opportunities: A Report to the National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  28. Glenn J. M., Brandt, L., & Andrews, F. E. (1947). Russell Sage Foundation 1907-1946. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  29. Greenwald, M. W., & Anderson, M. (Eds.). (1996). Pittsburgh Surveyed: Social Science and Social Reform in the Early Twentieth Century. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
  30. Hall, A. R., & Bainbridge, B. A. (1986). Physic and Philanthropy: A History of the Wellcome Trust 1936–1986. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Harris, J. (1977). William Beveridge: A Biography. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  32. Hunter, R. (1901). Tenement Conditions in Chicago. Chicago: City Homes Association.Google Scholar
  33. Hunter, R. (1904). Poverty. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  34. Karl, B. D. (1974). Charles E. Merriam and the Study of Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  35. Karl, B. D. (1983). The Uneasy State: The United States from 1914 to 1945. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  36. Karl, B. D., & Katz, S. N. (1981). The American private philanthropic foundation and the public sphere, 1890-1930. Minerva, 19, 236–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Karl, B. D., & Katz, S. N. (1987). Foundations and ruling class elites. Daedalus, 116(1), 1–40.Google Scholar
  38. Kellogg, P. U. (Ed.). (1909-1915). The Pittsburgh Survey: Findings in Six Volumes. New York: Charities Publication Committee.Google Scholar
  39. Kohler, R. E. (1978). A policy for the advancement of science: The Rockefeller Foundation 1924–1929. Minerva, 16, 480–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kohler, R. E. (1991). Partners in Science: Foundations and Natural Scientists 1900-1945. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  41. Lagemann, E. C. (1989). The Politics of Knowledge: The Carnegie Corporation, Philanthropy and Public Policy. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Laski, H. (1930). Foundations, universities and research. In The Dangers of Obedience and Other Essays, Ch. 6. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  43. Lindemann, E. C. (1936). Wealth and Culture: A Study of 100 Foundations during the Decade 1921–1930. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
  44. Lynn, L. E., Jr. (Ed.). (1978). Knowledge and Policy: The Uncertain Connection. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  45. Lyons, G. M. (1969). The Uneasy Partnership: Social Science and the Federal Government in the Twentieth Century. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  46. McBriar, A. M. (1987). An Edwardian Mixed Doubles: The Bosanquets versus the Webbs: A study in British Social Policy 1890-1929. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  47. Meacham, S. (1987). Toynbee Hall and Social Reform 1880-1914: The Search for Community. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Mennel, R. M. (1973). Thorns and Thistles: Juvenile Delinquents in the United States 1825-1940. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
  49. Mess, H. A., & Braithwaite, C. (1947). The great philanthropic trusts. In H. A. Mess et al., (Eds.), Voluntary Social Services since 1918 (pp. 172–187). London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner.Google Scholar
  50. Nielsen, A. (1985). The Golden Donors. New York: Dutton.Google Scholar
  51. President’s Research Committee on Social Trends. (1933). Recent Social Trends in the United States. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  52. Riis, J. (1890). How the Other Half Lives. New York: Scribner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rowntree, B. S. (1901). Poverty: A Study in Town Life. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  54. Rowntree, J. (1904). The founder’s memorandum. Reprinted in L. E. Waddilove, (1983). Private Philanthropy and Public Welfare (pp. xiii–xviii). London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  55. Sealander, J. (1997). Public Wealth and Private Life: Foundations, Philanthropy and the Reshaping of Social Policy from the Progressive Era to the New Deal America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Shils, E. (1979). The order of learning in the United States from 1865 to 1920: The ascendancy of the universities. In A. Oleson & J. Voss (Eds.), The Organization of Knowledge in Modern America (pp. 19–47). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Sklar, K. K. (1992). Hull-House maps and papers as women’s work in the 1890s. In M. Bulmer, K. Bales, & K. K. Sklar (Eds.), The Social Survey in Historical Perspective (pp. 111–147). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Terrill, R. (1974). R. H. Tawney and His Times: Socialism as Fellowship. London: Andre Deutsch.Google Scholar
  59. Veysey, L. R. (1965). The Emergence of the American University. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  60. Waddilove, L. E. (1983). Private Philanthropy and Public Welfare: The Joseph Rowntree Memorial Trust, 1954-1979. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  61. Weibe, R. H. (1975). The Segmented Society: An Introduction to the Meaning of America. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Wheatley, S. C. (1988). The Politics of Philanthropy: Abraham Flexner and Medical Education. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  63. Woods, R. (Ed.). (1899). The City Wilderness: A Settlement Study by Residents of the South End House. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Bulmer
    • 1
  1. 1.University of SurreyGuildford, SurreyUK

Personalised recommendations