Lesson Plans for the Industrial Revolution: The Presidents of the Industrial Revolution (1885-1901) – Part 2

The Election of 1892: Harrison’s Defeat and Cleveland’s Return

The presidential election of 1892 was a historic rematch between incumbent President Benjamin Harrison and former President Grover Cleveland. Four years earlier, in 1888, Harrison had narrowly defeated Cleveland despite losing the popular vote, thanks to strong support in key swing states. However, by 1892, the political landscape had shifted dramatically. Economic troubles, unpopular policies, and internal party divisions weakened Harrison’s chances of re-election, while Cleveland capitalized on public dissatisfaction. In a rare political reversal, Cleveland won back the presidency, making him the only U.S. president to serve two non-consecutive terms.

A Nation Frustrated with Harrison’s Policies

One of the main reasons for Harrison’s defeat was widespread economic discontent. His administration had championed high protective tariffs, particularly the McKinley Tariff Act of 1890, which raised import duties to nearly 50%. While the tariff was intended to protect American industries, it had the opposite effect—it made everyday goods more expensive for consumers and led to retaliatory tariffs from other nations, hurting American farmers who depended on exporting their crops. Many rural voters, who had supported Harrison in 1888, turned against him in 1892 as they struggled with declining prices for their agricultural products.

Labor unrest also played a significant role in Harrison’s declining popularity. The Industrial Revolution had transformed the U.S. economy, but it also led to harsh working conditions, low wages, and an increasing divide between the rich and the working class. During Harrison’s presidency, labor strikes became more frequent and sometimes violent. The Homestead Strike of 1892, a deadly conflict between steelworkers and industrialist Andrew Carnegie’s company, highlighted the growing tension between labor and big business. While the federal government did not directly intervene, many workers blamed Harrison’s pro-business policies for allowing corporations to exploit them.

A Democratic Resurgence and the Populist Challenge

Harrison’s Republican Party suffered a major setback in the 1890 midterm elections, when Democrats regained control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. This shift demonstrated widespread public dissatisfaction with Republican policies, particularly on economic issues. By 1892, the Democratic Party was well-positioned to reclaim the White House, and Cleveland remained its most popular and experienced leader.

A new political force also emerged in 1892: the Populist Party, also known as the People’s Party. Representing farmers, laborers, and rural Americans, the Populists called for monetary reform, government control of railroads, and direct election of senators. While they did not win the presidency, they split the anti-Harrison vote, further weakening the Republican base in key states.

A Bitter and Personal Campaign

Unlike the bitterly personal campaign of 1888, the 1892 election was relatively subdued. Both Harrison and Cleveland avoided direct attacks, in part due to personal tragedy. Harrison’s wife, Caroline Lavinia Scott Harrison, was gravely ill with tuberculosis during the campaign. As her health declined, Harrison scaled back his campaign activities, focusing on caring for his wife. Caroline passed away on October 25, 1892, just two weeks before the election. Harrison’s grief-stricken withdrawal from active campaigning left him politically vulnerable, while Cleveland and the Democrats continued their push to reclaim the presidency.

Cleveland’s campaign focused on tariff reform and economic relief, directly appealing to working-class and rural voters who had grown frustrated under Harrison’s policies. He promised to reverse the McKinley Tariff, ease economic burdens on farmers, and provide fairer treatment for laborers. His message resonated with voters, particularly in swing states like New York, Illinois, and Indiana, which had helped Harrison win in 1888 but now swung back to the Democrats.

Election Results and Cleveland’s Triumphant Return

On November 8, 1892, Cleveland won a decisive victory, reclaiming the White House with 277 electoral votes to Harrison’s 145. He also won the popular vote by a margin of over 380,000 votes, a clear sign that the nation had turned against Harrison’s leadership. The Populist candidate, James B. Weaver, won more than one million votes, carrying four Western states—Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, and Nevada—indicating growing unrest among farmers.

The election was a remarkable political comeback for Cleveland. His return to the presidency signaled a rejection of high tariffs, economic hardship, and Republican policies that seemed to favor big business over ordinary Americans. Meanwhile, Harrison’s defeat marked the end of an era of Republican dominance that had lasted for most of the post-Civil War period.

A Shift in Public Priorities

The election of 1892 was about more than just Cleveland and Harrison—it was a referendum on economic policy, labor conditions, and the role of government in protecting workers and farmers. Harrison’s presidency had been defined by pro-business policies and high tariffs, but as economic struggles worsened, voters sought relief in Cleveland’s promise of tariff reform and a return to a more balanced economic approach.

Although Cleveland’s second presidency would later be plagued by the Panic of 1893, his victory in 1892 demonstrated that Americans were demanding change. Harrison, on the other hand, left office quietly, returning to Indianapolis, where he resumed his legal career and public speaking. His presidency, while marked by significant accomplishments like the Sherman Antitrust Act and the admission of six new states, ultimately failed to address the growing concerns of farmers, workers, and struggling industries.

The election of 1892 remains one of the most significant in American history, not only because it saw the only non-consecutive presidential term in U.S. history but also because it marked a turning point in how Americans viewed government’s role in economic policy and trade regulation.

The Panic of 1893 and the End of the Silver Standard

When Grover Cleveland returned to the White House in 1893, he faced a nation on the brink of economic collapse. The Panic of 1893 triggered one of the worst financial crises in American history, leading to widespread unemployment, bank failures, and a sharp decline in industry. As the crisis unfolded, Cleveland and his administration took decisive, yet controversial, steps to stabilize the economy, including the repeal of the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, which effectively ended the use of silver as a monetary standard in favor of a gold-based economy.

The Causes and Impact of the Panic of 1893

The economic turmoil of 1893 was caused by a combination of over-speculation, railroad bankruptcies, declining agricultural prices, and a loss of investor confidence. In the years leading up to the crisis, railroads had been rapidly expanding, financed by loans and speculative investments. However, when major rail companies, such as the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad, collapsed under debt, panic spread through financial markets. Investors lost faith in the economy, leading to massive withdrawals from banks, causing over 500 banks and 15,000 businesses to fail within a year.

Unemployment skyrocketed, reaching nearly 20%, and industrial production plummeted as factories shut down due to lack of capital. Farmers, already struggling with falling crop prices, found it even more difficult to sell their goods, as deflation set in. The economic downturn was further exacerbated by the ongoing debate over the silver standard, which had been a contentious issue in American politics for years.

The Silver Standard and the Sherman Silver Purchase Act

Since the passage of the Sherman Silver Purchase Act in 1890, the federal government had been required to purchase large amounts of silver and issue paper currency backed by both gold and silver. This policy was meant to appease both industrialists, who favored a gold standard, and farmers and miners, who wanted silver to be used as legal tender to increase the money supply and ease debt burdens. However, the act drained gold reserves, as investors and foreign creditors increasingly demanded gold in exchange for U.S. currency.

By 1893, the gold reserves of the U.S. Treasury had dropped dangerously low, threatening the stability of the dollar. International confidence in the U.S. economy weakened, leading to massive withdrawals of gold from banks, worsening the panic. Cleveland, a staunch supporter of the gold standard, believed that the reliance on silver had destabilized the economy and needed to be reversed to restore financial confidence.

Repealing the Sherman Silver Purchase Act and Returning to the Gold Standard

Determined to stabilize the economy, Cleveland called a special session of Congress in August 1893 to demand the repeal of the Sherman Silver Purchase Act. His argument was clear—continuing to back currency with silver would only deplete gold reserves further and erode confidence in the U.S. economy. The repeal faced significant opposition from Western and Southern lawmakers, who represented farming and mining interests that benefited from silver coinage. However, Cleveland, with the support of pro-gold Democrats and Republicans, successfully pushed through the repeal in November 1893.

With the repeal, the United States effectively moved toward a gold standard, where all paper currency was now redeemable in gold alone. This shift aimed to reassure both foreign investors and domestic financial markets that the U.S. economy would be backed by a stable and internationally recognized monetary system. However, it also contracted the money supply, worsening the economic downturn for farmers and debtors who relied on silver-backed currency.

Consequences of the Repeal and the Long-Term Impact

While Cleveland’s decision to repeal the Sherman Silver Purchase Act stabilized gold reserves and reassured investors, it did little to immediately alleviate the suffering of the working class. Without silver-backed currency in circulation, deflation continued, making it harder for businesses to recover and farmers to pay off debts. Many workers blamed Cleveland for siding with Wall Street and industrialists, deepening resentment against his administration.

The repeal also intensified the divide between gold standard advocates and free silver supporters, a conflict that would dominate American politics for the rest of the decade. In 1896, the Democratic Party, led by William Jennings Bryan, embraced the free silver movement, calling for a return to bimetallism to expand the money supply. This issue became the central theme of the 1896 presidential election, where Bryan’s famous “Cross of Gold” speech highlighted the struggle between farmers, workers, and industrial capitalists over monetary policy.

Despite the immediate financial stabilization that the repeal brought, the Panic of 1893 lingered for several more years, and Cleveland’s handling of the crisis made him deeply unpopular. His refusal to intervene with government aid or job programs further alienated working-class Americans, setting the stage for the rise of progressivism and government-backed economic reforms in the early 20th century.

By the early 1900s, the U.S. had fully transitioned to the Gold Standard Act of 1900, which officially declared gold as the sole basis for U.S. currency, marking the end of the silver standard debate. This system remained in place until the early 20th century, when economic pressures during the Great Depression and World War II led to a rethinking of global monetary policy.

A Divisive Economic Legacy

Grover Cleveland’s handling of the Panic of 1893 and the repeal of the Sherman Silver Purchase Act remains one of the most debated aspects of his presidency. While he succeeded in restoring financial confidence and maintaining the gold standard, his policies deepened economic hardship for the working class and rural Americans. His commitment to conservative economic principles over immediate relief measures cost him political support, and by the time he left office in 1897, the Democratic Party had largely moved away from his vision.

Ultimately, the Panic of 1893 and the silver debate shaped the course of U.S. economic policy for decades, influencing the future of monetary policy, labor movements, and political realignments that would define the 20th century. The transition to a full gold standard brought stability in the long run, but it came at the cost of short-term suffering for millions of Americans. Cleveland’s economic policies, though rooted in traditional fiscal conservatism, revealed the challenges of balancing financial stability with the needs of a rapidly industrializing and diversifying nation.

The Election of 1896: William McKinley’s Victory and the Shift in American Politics

The presidential election of 1896 was one of the most significant and transformative elections in American history. It pitted Republican William McKinley against Democrat William Jennings Bryan, a charismatic populist who rallied farmers and laborers with his call for "free silver." The election took place during a period of economic crisis and national uncertainty, following the Panic of 1893, which had left millions unemployed and deepened tensions between industrial and agricultural America. The outcome of the election ultimately gave McKinley the presidency, cemented the dominance of the Republican Party, and set the nation firmly on a path toward a gold-based economy and industrial expansion.

The Economic Crisis and Public Discontent

By 1896, the United States was still suffering from the effects of the Panic of 1893, one of the worst economic depressions in the nation's history. Bank failures, industrial shutdowns, and widespread unemployment had created intense frustration, especially among farmers and laborers, who struggled under falling crop prices and crushing debts. Many blamed President Grover Cleveland’s economic policies, particularly his repeal of the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, which had removed silver-backed money from circulation and led to deflation. This deflation made it harder for farmers to repay debts, further fueling resentment against the economic policies of the Democratic Party.

At the same time, industrialists, bankers, and business leaders supported a return to economic stability and the gold standard, believing that silver-backed money would lead to uncontrollable inflation and financial instability. The election of 1896 became a referendum on the future of American economic policy, with McKinley representing gold-backed currency and business interests, while Bryan championed the struggling farmers and working-class Americans who wanted free silver.

William Jennings Bryan and the Free Silver Movement

The Democratic Party, deeply divided over economic policy, found an unexpected champion in William Jennings Bryan, a fiery orator from Nebraska. At the Democratic National Convention, Bryan delivered his famous “Cross of Gold” speech, in which he passionately denounced the gold standard and declared, “You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold!” This speech electrified the audience and secured him the Democratic nomination, despite his relative youth and lack of executive experience.

Bryan campaigned on a platform of free silver, arguing that increasing the money supply with silver-backed currency would help farmers and debtors by raising prices and making it easier to repay loans. His populist message energized rural voters and the working class, particularly in the South and West, where economic hardship was most severe. However, his radical economic proposals alarmed business leaders and urban voters, who feared inflation and economic instability.

McKinley’s Front Porch Campaign and Republican Strategy

Unlike Bryan, who embarked on an aggressive nationwide campaign, traveling thousands of miles to deliver fiery speeches, William McKinley took a different approach. Advised by his political strategist, Mark Hanna, McKinley conducted a “front porch campaign” from his home in Canton, Ohio, where he received delegations of supporters and delivered carefully crafted speeches emphasizing economic stability, business growth, and national unity.

Hanna, a wealthy industrialist and master campaign strategist, orchestrated one of the most well-funded and organized campaigns in U.S. history. The Republican Party outspent the Democrats by a ratio of nearly 5 to 1, flooding the country with pro-McKinley literature, advertisements, and speeches. Business leaders, fearful of Bryan’s pro-silver, anti-business policies, poured millions into McKinley’s campaign, ensuring that his message reached every corner of the country.

McKinley’s campaign focused on "sound money" (the gold standard), high tariffs to protect American industries, and economic recovery. He reassured voters that his policies would bring prosperity, restore business confidence, and lift the nation out of depression. While Bryan’s populist message resonated with farmers, McKinley’s appeal to urban workers, business owners, and middle-class voters ultimately proved stronger.

The Election Results: A Victory for McKinley and the Gold Standard

On November 3, 1896, McKinley won a decisive victory over Bryan, securing 271 electoral votes to Bryan’s 176. The results revealed a deep divide in the country: Bryan carried the South and the agrarian West, while McKinley dominated the Northeast, Midwest, and industrialized regions. McKinley’s victory was particularly significant because it cemented the Republican Party as the dominant political force for the next several decades.

The election was not just a victory for McKinley but also for the gold standard and industrial capitalism. With McKinley in office, the U.S. officially adopted the Gold Standard Act in 1900, ensuring that the nation’s currency would remain backed solely by gold. This decision pleased bankers, industrialists, and international investors, but it further alienated farmers and laborers, who felt abandoned by the political system.

Why the Public Chose McKinley Over Bryan

Several factors contributed to McKinley’s victory. First, the Republican campaign was better funded and more organized, allowing McKinley’s message to reach a wider audience than Bryan’s. Second, business leaders and financial institutions supported McKinley, fearing that Bryan’s free silver policies would lead to inflation and economic chaos. Third, urban workers and middle-class voters ultimately sided with McKinley, believing that economic recovery under a gold standard was more secure than Bryan’s radical monetary policies.

Additionally, Bryan’s strong identification with rural, agricultural interests made it difficult for him to appeal to urban and industrial workers, who were becoming an increasingly important voting bloc. While he inspired deep loyalty among his followers, he also alienated moderates and business leaders, who saw him as too extreme.

McKinley, in contrast, presented himself as a stable, experienced leader who could bring economic recovery. His message of “prosperity and progress” reassured voters that the Republican Party would restore national stability and economic growth.

A Turning Point in American Politics

The election of 1896 was more than just a political contest—it was a turning point in American economic and political history. It signaled the decline of the agrarian-based Democratic Party and the rise of an industrial, urban-focused Republican Party that would dominate American politics for the next generation. It also marked the final defeat of the free silver movement, firmly establishing gold as the foundation of the U.S. economy.

McKinley’s presidency would usher in an era of economic recovery, expansion, and increased global influence for the United States. However, the deep divisions revealed in the 1896 election—between rural and urban America, labor and capital, silver and gold—would continue to shape American politics in the years to come.

William McKinley: A Life of Service, War, and Tragedy

On January 29, 1843, in a small town in Niles, Ohio, a baby boy was born into a hardworking, middle-class family. William McKinley Jr. was the seventh of nine children, raised by parents who valued education, faith, and public service. His father ran an iron foundry, and his mother, a deeply religious woman, instilled in him the values of honesty, perseverance, and devotion to country. No one in Niles could have imagined that young William would one day rise to become the 25th President of the United States, leading the nation through war, economic change, and ultimately, personal tragedy.

A Young Man Called to War

McKinley’s early life was one of modest ambition and steady work. He attended local schools before enrolling at Allegheny College, but illness forced him to return home. Searching for direction, he took up teaching, but the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861 would forever change his course.

At just 18 years old, McKinley enlisted in the Union Army, joining the 23rd Ohio Infantry Regiment as a private. Though he was young and inexperienced, he quickly proved himself. In the heat of battle at Antietam in 1862, McKinley, then just a commissary sergeant, showed extraordinary bravery by bringing food and supplies to soldiers under enemy fire. His courage did not go unnoticed. Rising through the ranks, he eventually became a major, earning the lifelong nickname “Major McKinley.”

By the war’s end, McKinley had served four years and saw firsthand the devastation of battle. His experiences in war shaped his deep respect for veterans, a value that would define much of his future political career.

Law, Love, and Politics

After the war, McKinley studied law and passed the Ohio bar in 1867, settling in Canton, Ohio, where he built a successful practice. It was in Canton that he met Ida Saxton, the daughter of a wealthy banker. They married in 1871, and their love was deep and unwavering. However, tragedy soon struck.

The McKinleys had two daughters, but both died in infancy. Ida, overcome with grief, developed severe epilepsy, suffering from frequent seizures. This heartache changed McKinley’s life—he dedicated himself to caring for her, showing unwavering devotion, often sitting by her side for hours during her attacks. Throughout his political career, he never wavered in his love for Ida, ensuring that she was always cared for, even during his presidency.

Despite personal struggles, McKinley’s career flourished. He entered politics in 1876, winning a seat in Congress, where he became known for his intellect, charm, and strong advocacy for protective tariffs. He believed tariffs protected American businesses and workers, making him popular among industrialists and laborers alike. His political rise was steady, and in 1891, he was elected Governor of Ohio, further strengthening his reputation as a thoughtful and compassionate leader.

The Election of 1896: A Nation in Crisis

By 1896, the U.S. was in economic turmoil, suffering from the effects of the Panic of 1893. Farmers and workers struggled, and a great political divide had formed between those who supported the Gold Standard and those who advocated for Free Silver to increase the money supply.

McKinley, a pro-business Republican, campaigned on economic stability, high tariffs, and maintaining the Gold Standard. His opponent, William Jennings Bryan, was a young, fiery Democrat who electrified crowds with his “Cross of Gold” speech, arguing that silver would help the working class.

McKinley ran a modern campaign, orchestrated by his brilliant campaign manager, Mark Hanna. While Bryan traveled across the country giving speeches, McKinley stayed in his home in Canton, welcoming thousands of visitors in what became known as the “Front Porch Campaign.” His message of economic recovery and national unity resonated with voters. On November 3, 1896, McKinley defeated Bryan decisively, becoming the 25th President of the United States.

A Prosperous Presidency and the Spanish-American War

McKinley entered the White House in 1897, promising to restore economic confidence. His policies, including the Dingley Tariff Act, strengthened industry, and the economy gradually recovered. However, his presidency soon faced a defining moment: the Spanish-American War.

By 1898, tensions between Spain and the U.S. over Cuba’s fight for independence had escalated. When the USS Maine exploded in Havana Harbor, killing 260 American sailors, cries of "Remember the Maine!" swept the country. Though McKinley initially sought diplomacy, the public and Congress demanded war.

War and Victory

• The Spanish-American War lasted just four months.

• The U.S. gained victories in Cuba, the Philippines, and Puerto Rico.

• Spain surrendered, and the Treaty of Paris (1898) granted the U.S. control of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines.

• The war cemented America as a global power, marking the beginning of U.S. imperialism.

While McKinley was reluctant to embrace expansion, he believed the U.S. had a duty to govern its new territories, arguing that it was America’s responsibility to civilize and guide them toward self-government.

Reelection and a Sudden Tragedy

By 1900, the economy was booming, the U.S. had emerged victorious in war, and McKinley was hugely popular. He easily won reelection, again defeating William Jennings Bryan. His new vice president? The energetic and ambitious Theodore Roosevelt.

As McKinley began his second term, he planned to further unite the nation and strengthen international ties. But fate had other plans.

The Assassination

On September 6, 1901, McKinley was in Buffalo, New York, attending the Pan-American Exposition, a world fair celebrating technological progress. As he greeted a long line of admirers, a man stepped forward with a hand wrapped in a bandage. Inside was a pistol.

The man, Leon Czolgosz, an anarchist who despised government power, fired two bullets into McKinley’s abdomen. The president staggered but remained calm, urging his men not to harm the assassin.

For a few days, it seemed McKinley would recover. Doctors were optimistic, and Ida remained by his bedside. But by September 13, infection had set in, and McKinley’s health rapidly declined. On September 14, 1901, William McKinley passed away. His last words were a quiet, "It is God's way. His will, not ours, be done."

The nation mourned deeply, and Theodore Roosevelt was sworn in as president. McKinley’s death shocked the country and reinforced the dangers of political extremism.

Legacy of a Steady Leader

William McKinley’s presidency transformed America, guiding it through economic recovery, war, and expansion. His policies laid the foundation for modern industrial growth, and his leadership in war and diplomacy shaped America’s role on the global stage.

But beyond politics, he is remembered for his kindness, devotion to his wife, and steady leadership. He was a humble man of the people, who rose from a small Ohio town to the highest office in the land.

His assassination marked the end of an era, but his influence lived on in Theodore Roosevelt, who would carry forward McKinley’s vision of a strong, modern America.

William McKinley and His Role in the Industrial Revolution

William McKinley’s presidency, from 1897 to 1901, took place during the height of the Industrial Revolution in America. This period was marked by rapid industrial growth, urbanization, advances in technology, and the rise of corporate monopolies. McKinley’s policies reflected a commitment to economic expansion, protectionist trade policies, and business-friendly legislation, which helped shape the future of industrial America. His leadership not only fostered economic stability but also solidified the United States’ position as a global industrial power. However, his approach also favored large businesses and limited direct support for labor movements, creating economic disparities that would later define the Progressive Era.

The McKinley Tariff and Protectionist Policies

McKinley had long been a proponent of high tariffs, believing that protecting American industries from foreign competition was essential for economic growth. Before becoming president, he was instrumental in passing the McKinley Tariff of 1890, which significantly increased import taxes on foreign goods. As president, he continued these policies, signing the Dingley Tariff Act of 1897, which raised tariffs to record levels. These tariffs protected American manufacturers, steel producers, and textile industries, allowing them to expand and dominate the domestic market. Industrialists such as Andrew Carnegie in steel and John D. Rockefeller in oil benefited tremendously, as foreign competition was reduced, and American production increased. However, these tariffs also raised consumer prices, making everyday goods more expensive for ordinary Americans. While they fueled industrial expansion, they also contributed to a growing divide between the wealthy business elite and working-class Americans.

Encouraging Economic Stability and Business Growth

McKinley entered office at a time when the country was recovering from the Panic of 1893, a devastating economic depression that led to bank failures, unemployment, and business closures. His policies were aimed at restoring economic confidence and encouraging business investment. His commitment to the Gold Standard, which he later solidified with the Gold Standard Act of 1900, reassured investors that the U.S. currency would be backed by gold, rather than a fluctuating silver standard. This stability encouraged banks and businesses to invest in industrial expansion, leading to a surge in railroad development, factory production, and technological innovation.

Under McKinley’s leadership, new industries flourished, particularly in electricity, telecommunications, and machinery. The spread of electrification allowed factories to increase production rates, while improvements in transportation and communication made it easier for businesses to operate on a national and even international scale. His pro-business policies ensured that corporations faced minimal government intervention, which encouraged industrial leaders to consolidate power and expand their enterprises.

The Rise of Trusts and Big Business

While McKinley’s administration encouraged industrial growth, it also saw the rise of corporate monopolies and business trusts, which controlled major industries such as steel, oil, and railroads. These trusts allowed a few powerful businessmen to dominate the market, reducing competition and increasing the wealth gap between industrial tycoons and the working class. McKinley, unlike later presidents such as Theodore Roosevelt, did not take aggressive action to break up monopolies. While he acknowledged the growing influence of trusts, he believed that a strong industrial sector was essential to American prosperity, and he preferred to work with business leaders rather than regulate them.

However, this approach led to widespread criticism from labor unions and farmers, who felt that McKinley’s administration favored big business at their expense. Many workers struggled under poor conditions, long hours, and low wages, while monopolies dictated market prices and controlled vast sectors of the economy. His administration’s reluctance to directly intervene in labor disputes created growing tensions between workers and industrial leaders, tensions that would later come to a head in the Progressive Era.

Industrialization and the Spanish-American War

McKinley’s presidency not only shaped industrial policies at home but also expanded American influence abroad, further boosting industrial expansion. The Spanish-American War in 1898 led to the acquisition of new territories, including Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines, opening up new markets for American goods and raw materials. The war also stimulated industries such as shipbuilding, steel production, and military equipment manufacturing, leading to further industrial growth. As the United States took on a more imperial role, businesses benefited from increased access to global trade networks, which further cemented the nation’s status as an industrial powerhouse.

In addition, McKinley’s push for economic expansion through trade agreements helped industries gain foreign markets, ensuring continued industrial production and economic growth. His advocacy for an “Open Door” policy in China aimed to secure equal trading opportunities for American businesses, reinforcing the idea that industrial strength and global influence were deeply interconnected.

McKinley’s Legacy in the Industrial Revolution

William McKinley’s presidency played a crucial role in shaping the economic and industrial policies of the United States. His commitment to high tariffs, economic stability, and business-friendly policies allowed American industries to thrive and expand, but they also contributed to economic inequality and the concentration of corporate power. While he did not take strong measures against monopolies, his policies laid the groundwork for future debates on trust regulation, labor rights, and corporate responsibility.

His assassination in 1901 brought Theodore Roosevelt to the presidency, a leader who would take a much more aggressive approach to regulating big business and protecting workers. While McKinley’s policies helped stabilize and grow the American economy, his reluctance to address the darker side of industrialization—exploitation, labor unrest, and monopolistic control—left unresolved challenges for the next generation of leaders. Nonetheless, McKinley remains a pivotal figure in the Industrial Revolution, a president who presided over a transformative era in American economic history.

Tariffs, Tragedy, and Triumph: The Road to the Spanish-American War

In 1897, President William McKinley took office at a time when the United States stood at a crossroads. The economy was recovering from the devastating Panic of 1893, but American industries were still seeking stability and protection. Factories needed new markets, businesses wanted safeguards against foreign competition, and many Americans, inspired by a spirit of expansionism, believed the nation was destined to grow beyond its borders. McKinley, a staunch believer in economic protectionism, quickly moved to implement policies that would strengthen the economy. His solution was the Dingley Tariff Act of 1897, the highest tariff in American history at the time.

Just a year later, however, an unexpected explosion in Havana Harbor would ignite passions for war. What had started as a debate over trade policies and industrial growth soon turned into a struggle for empire, as the United States found itself engaged in a war with Spain. This conflict, fought in Cuba and across the Pacific, would bring new territories under American control and redefine the nation’s role on the world stage.

The Dingley Tariff Act of 1897: Strengthening Industry and Trade

McKinley wasted no time in addressing America’s economic troubles. With the support of his Republican allies, he pushed for high tariffs that would protect American manufacturers from foreign competition while also increasing government revenue. In July 1897, just months after taking office, he signed the Dingley Tariff Act into law. The legislation raised import taxes on a wide range of goods, making American-made products more competitive domestically.

Industries such as steel, textiles, and agriculture flourished under the protective tariff, as foreign imports became more expensive. The increased revenues strengthened the federal government’s financial position, later providing funds for military expansion. However, not all nations welcomed this economic strategy. European countries, seeing the tariffs as an aggressive move against their trade interests, responded with retaliatory restrictions on American exports. This worsened tensions with Spain, whose economy relied heavily on selling sugar to the United States.

As Cuban sugar plantations suffered under the weight of the new trade restrictions, the island’s long-simmering rebellion against Spanish rule escalated. The crisis in Cuba was drawing America’s attention, and McKinley found himself presiding over a nation increasingly invested in its neighbor’s fight for independence.

Cuba’s Struggle for Independence and the USS Maine

For decades, Cuban revolutionaries had sought to free their island from Spanish colonial rule. Spain, determined to hold onto one of its last remaining colonies in the Americas, responded with brutal force. Spanish General Valeriano Weyler implemented a harsh reconcentration policy, forcing thousands of Cuban civilians into overcrowded camps where disease and starvation claimed countless lives.

The crisis did not go unnoticed in the United States. Many American businesses had investments in Cuba, particularly in sugar plantations, and feared that the ongoing conflict would destroy trade. The American press, led by newspapers such as Joseph Pulitzer’s New York World and William Randolph Hearst’s New York Journal, inflamed public sentiment through sensationalized stories about Spanish atrocities. Known as “yellow journalism,” this exaggerated reporting fueled anger and sympathy for the Cuban rebels, drawing comparisons between their struggle and America’s own revolution against Britain.

Although McKinley preferred diplomacy over war, he could not ignore the mounting tensions. In early 1898, hoping to ease the situation and protect American citizens in Cuba, he ordered the USS Maine to dock in Havana Harbor. The battleship’s presence was meant to reassure the public and send a quiet warning to Spain. However, on the night of February 15, 1898, disaster struck. A sudden explosion tore through the Maine, sinking the ship and killing 261 American sailors.

The cause of the explosion remained uncertain. Later investigations would suggest that a coal fire may have ignited ammunition on board, but at the time, the American public and press immediately blamed Spain. Headlines across the country screamed: “Remember the Maine! To Hell with Spain!” Public outrage soared, and the calls for war became impossible to ignore. Though McKinley had initially resisted military intervention, the growing pressure from Congress, the press, and the American people left him little choice. On April 25, 1898, the United States declared war on Spain.

The Spanish-American War: A Global Conflict

The Spanish-American War was brief, lasting only ten weeks, but its consequences were immense. In Cuba, American forces landed in June 1898, led by General William Shafter. Among the most famous battles was the charge up San Juan Hill, led by Theodore Roosevelt and his Rough Riders, securing a critical victory for the United States. Meanwhile, the Spanish fleet was decisively defeated at Santiago Bay, forcing Spain to surrender its control of Cuba.

While Cuba was the central battleground, the war also extended far beyond the Caribbean. McKinley and his advisors saw an opportunity to expand American influence into the Pacific. On May 1, 1898, in Manila Bay, Commodore George Dewey led a surprise attack on the Spanish fleet, completely destroying it with minimal American casualties. Within weeks, the United States had taken control of the Philippines. American forces also occupied Guam and Puerto Rico, securing further victories against Spain’s colonial empire.

By August 1898, Spain had no choice but to surrender. The war formally ended with the signing of the Treaty of Paris in December 1898, marking the dawn of a new era in American expansionism.

The Spoils of War: America’s New Empire

Under the Treaty of Paris, Spain ceded several of its last remaining colonies to the United States. Cuba, though technically granted independence, became a U.S. protectorate under the Platt Amendment, which gave the U.S. the right to intervene in Cuban affairs. Puerto Rico became an official U.S. territory, a status it retains today. Guam, a strategically located Pacific island, was also placed under American control. However, the most controversial acquisition was the Philippines.

McKinley, after much debate, decided to annex the Philippines, arguing that it was America’s duty to “civilize” the islands and prepare them for self-rule. This decision sparked fierce opposition from anti-imperialists, including figures such as Mark Twain and Andrew Carnegie, who believed that America was betraying its democratic ideals by ruling over foreign peoples. Filipino resistance to American control led to the Philippine-American War, a brutal conflict that lasted until 1902 and challenged the United States’ new imperial ambitions.

A Nation Transformed

The Spanish-American War marked a turning point in American history. What had begun as a debate over trade policies and tariffs had evolved into a war that expanded America’s influence across the globe. The United States emerged as a global power with overseas territories, a strengthened military, and an expanded economy. McKinley’s presidency became defined by industrial growth and expansionism, setting the stage for America’s future role on the world stage.

Yet, not all Americans celebrated the newfound empire. Debates over imperialism, economic policy, and America’s responsibility toward its new territories continued for years. McKinley’s leadership had brought the nation through war and economic recovery, but his time in office would soon be cut short. Just three years after the war ended, in 1901, he was assassinated, leaving his successor, Theodore Roosevelt, to shape the next chapter of America’s industrial and imperial future.

The explosion of the Maine may have been an accident, but its aftermath was history in the making. The United States had stepped onto the world stage, and there was no turning back.

The Consequences of McKinley’s Choices: Imperialism, War, and Tragedy

William McKinley entered the presidency in 1897 as a leader committed to economic recovery and industrial expansion, but by the time of his assassination in 1901, he had led the United States into a new era of imperialism, foreign conflicts, and controversy. His policies in the Spanish-American War (1898) and the annexation of the Philippines (1899) fundamentally changed America’s role in the world, but they also sparked domestic outrage, led to brutal military conflicts, and cost him his life. While he believed he was guiding the nation toward prosperity and global influence, the choices he made resulted in bitter resistance abroad and violent opposition at home.

McKinley’s Imperialist Policies and the Philippines Insurrection

McKinley had never sought war with Spain, but after the explosion of the USS Maine in 1898, he succumbed to public and political pressure to intervene in Cuba. The Spanish-American War, though brief, ended with the United States seizing control of former Spanish colonies, including Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. With victory came a crucial decision—what to do with these newly acquired territories. McKinley, believing in American expansionism, chose to annex the Philippines rather than grant them independence.

This decision was met with fierce opposition, both at home and abroad. Many Filipinos had fought alongside Americans to defeat Spain, believing they were fighting for their own independence. When McKinley refused to recognize Filipino sovereignty, an armed resistance movement emerged, led by Emilio Aguinaldo. The Philippines Insurrection (1899-1902) became a long, brutal, and costly conflict, forcing the U.S. military into harsh counterinsurgency tactics.

McKinley justified his actions by claiming it was America’s duty to “civilize and Christianize” the Filipino people, despite the fact that the Philippines was already a predominantly Catholic nation. He saw American rule as a benevolent mission, but in practice, it resulted in a war marked by guerrilla warfare, brutal crackdowns, and thousands of civilian casualties.

Brutal Suppression and the Cost of Colonial Rule

The war in the Philippines quickly turned into one of the most controversial conflicts in American history. The U.S. military, unprepared for prolonged guerrilla warfare, resorted to extreme measures to suppress the rebellion. Reports of torture, massacres, and the forced relocation of Filipino civilians shocked many Americans. One of the most notorious tactics was the “water cure”, a form of waterboarding used to extract information from Filipino prisoners.

At home, anti-imperialists such as Mark Twain, Andrew Carnegie, and William Jennings Bryan denounced McKinley’s policies as a betrayal of American values. The Anti-Imperialist League, formed in 1898, argued that the U.S. had no right to rule over another nation without its consent. Even some of McKinley’s supporters began questioning whether the United States should be in the business of empire-building.

Despite the criticism, McKinley remained committed to American control of the Philippines, believing it was in the nation’s economic and strategic interest. However, the war dragged on, and by 1901, American forces were still struggling to suppress the last remnants of the resistance. What had started as a quick military campaign had turned into a bloody colonial war, tarnishing McKinley’s reputation and fueling unrest among both progressives and radicals.

The Assassination of McKinley: A Nation’s Turning Point

As McKinley began his second term in 1901, he remained popular among business leaders and imperialists, but his enemies had grown in number. Labor strikes, economic inequalities, and opposition to his foreign policies had created a volatile political climate. Among those who despised McKinley’s pro-business and imperialist stance was a young anarchist named Leon Czolgosz, who had been influenced by radical political movements that viewed government as corrupt and oppressive.

On September 6, 1901, while attending the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo, New York, McKinley was greeting the public when Czolgosz approached him in line. Concealing a pistol beneath a handkerchief, Czolgosz shot McKinley twice in the abdomen. The president staggered but remained composed, even urging his men not to harm the assassin.

At first, it seemed McKinley might survive. Doctors operated, and the president appeared to be recovering. However, within days, infection set in, and his condition worsened. On September 14, 1901, he succumbed to his wounds. His final words reflected his religious faith: “It is God’s way. His will, not ours, be done.”

The Consequences of McKinley’s Leadership and Death

McKinley’s assassination shocked the nation, but it also accelerated political change. His imperialist policies and economic conservatism had shaped the late 19th century, but his death ushered in the Progressive Era, led by his successor, Theodore Roosevelt. Changes in foreign policy include:

• Under Roosevelt, the Philippines Insurrection was finally crushed, but the brutal nature of the war left a stain on America’s reputation.

• The U.S. retained control over its new colonies, but growing resentment in these territories led to decades of resistance and conflict.

Impact on Domestic Politics

• McKinley’s assassination energized progressives, who sought to regulate big business, improve labor conditions, and reform American politics.

• Roosevelt, unlike McKinley, embraced government intervention in industry, setting the stage for the breakup of monopolies and increased worker protections.

A Divided Legacy

McKinley’s presidency is remembered as a turning point in U.S. history. His decisions expanded America’s global influence, but they also came at a cost—a war in the Philippines, a rise in anti-American sentiment, and his own death at the hands of a radical who saw him as a symbol of oppression.

While McKinley believed he was acting in America’s best interest, his imperialist ambitions and economic priorities ultimately led to some of the most contentious events of his time. His choices laid the foundation for the 20th-century American empire, but also for the conflicts and struggles that would follow.

McKinley’s story is one of ambition, consequence, and tragedy—a leader who won wars abroad but lost control at home, paying the ultimate price for the expansion of American power.

Life Lessons from U.S. Presidents During the Peak of the Industrial Revolution

The Industrial Revolution in the United States, particularly during the late 19th century (1865–1901), was a time of extraordinary transformation. Innovations in manufacturing, transportation, and communication reshaped society, while economic expansion led to both unprecedented wealth and growing inequality. The men who served as president during this era—Andrew Johnson, Ulysses S. Grant, Rutherford B. Hayes, James Garfield, Chester Arthur, Grover Cleveland, Benjamin Harrison, and William McKinley—faced complex challenges in governing a rapidly modernizing nation.

By studying these leaders, we gain valuable life lessons and insights into leadership, decision-making, and the impact of government policies on industrial growth, labor, and social change. Their successes and failures reveal essential thought processes that can help us navigate challenges in our own lives.

1. The Power of Resilience and Adaptability

The Industrial Revolution was a time of constant change, requiring leaders to adapt to new economic realities and shifting public demands. Presidents who embraced resilience and adaptability were often more effective in governing a nation undergoing such rapid transformation.

Lesson from Grover Cleveland: Integrity Amid Political Shifts

Grover Cleveland is the only U.S. president to serve two non-consecutive terms (1885–1889 and 1893–1897), demonstrating resilience and perseverance. After losing the 1888 election, he did not retreat from politics but instead used his time outside office to reassess the nation’s economic challenges. When he returned in 1893, he faced the Panic of 1893, a devastating economic depression. Instead of changing his core principles, he stuck to his belief in limited government intervention, even though it made him unpopular.

Life Lesson:

• Setbacks are not the end of the road. Cleveland’s return to power after defeat shows the importance of perseverance and staying true to one’s principles, even when the tide turns against you.

• Adaptation does not mean compromising integrity. Cleveland adjusted his policies to meet new economic realities but remained firm in his fiscal conservatism and commitment to reducing government corruption.

2. The Balance Between Innovation and Ethics

The Industrial Revolution was an age of groundbreaking innovation, but it also led to monopolies, exploitation, and economic disparity. The challenge for leaders was finding a balance between encouraging progress and ensuring ethical business practices.

Lesson from Benjamin Harrison: Regulating Business While Encouraging Growth

Benjamin Harrison’s presidency (1889–1893) saw both economic expansion and growing corporate power. He signed the Sherman Antitrust Act (1890), the first federal law aimed at preventing monopolies and business collusion. Though not aggressively enforced at the time, this law laid the foundation for future trust-busting efforts under Theodore Roosevelt.

Harrison also pushed for the McKinley Tariff Act (1890), raising protective tariffs to benefit U.S. industries. While this helped manufacturers, it also led to higher consumer prices, demonstrating the difficulty in balancing business growth with public interest.

Life Lesson:

• Innovation and progress must be guided by ethical responsibility. Just as Harrison sought to regulate monopolies, modern leaders must ensure that economic expansion does not come at the expense of fairness and opportunity.

• Every decision has unintended consequences. The McKinley Tariff was designed to boost industry but ended up making goods more expensive for consumers, a reminder to consider the broader impact of policies and actions.

3. The Importance of Labor Rights and Fair Treatment

As industries grew, so did the workforce, but often under poor conditions, low wages, and long hours. Presidents of this era had to balance corporate interests with the rights of workers, and some did so more successfully than others.

Lesson from William McKinley: Economic Expansion Must Include the Workforce

McKinley (1897–1901) presided over one of the strongest economic booms in U.S. history. He championed high tariffs to protect American businesses, which helped industrial expansion. However, his administration also recognized that growth should not come at the expense of workers. He avoided direct labor conflicts but encouraged moderation in labor disputes, setting the stage for a more cooperative approach between labor and industry.

His assassination in 1901 cut his presidency short, but his policies highlighted a growing recognition of labor rights—a lesson that would fully materialize under his successor, Theodore Roosevelt.

Life Lesson:

• Sustained economic success depends on fairness and inclusion. The workforce is just as important as industry leaders; policies that only benefit one side can create unrest and instability.

• Leadership is about bringing balance. McKinley supported business growth but also sought stability in labor relations, showing that great leadership requires understanding all sides of an issue.

4. The Role of Government in a Changing World

The Industrial Revolution challenged traditional ideas about government intervention. Some presidents believed in limited government, while others saw the need for federal oversight to regulate industry and protect workers.

Lesson from Rutherford B. Hayes: The Government’s Role in Protecting Stability

Rutherford B. Hayes (1877–1881) became president during the Great Railroad Strike of 1877, one of the first major nationwide labor uprisings. When workers protested wage cuts, railroads and factories shut down, leading to riots and violence. Hayes sent federal troops to restore order, a controversial decision that raised questions about government involvement in labor disputes.

Though Hayes believed in limited government, his actions set a precedent for federal intervention in economic and labor issues. Later, other presidents would have to find better solutions to balance labor rights with economic stability.

Life Lesson:

• Ignoring problems does not solve them. Hayes preferred a hands-off approach to government, but the reality of the labor strike forced him to act. Leaders must be prepared to step in when necessary.

• Government policies must evolve with changing realities. The Industrial Revolution demanded new solutions, and leaders who failed to adapt often lost public support.

5. Leadership Requires Both Strength and Compassion

Presidents during this era faced intense pressures from industrialists, laborers, and political factions. The most effective leaders balanced firm decision-making with genuine concern for the people they governed.

Lesson from James Garfield: Leadership’s Human Side

James Garfield (1881) had one of the shortest presidencies in history due to his assassination, but his brief time in office revealed a leader committed to fairness and education. Coming from humble beginnings, Garfield believed in meritocracy, supporting civil service reform to reduce corruption and open opportunities based on ability, not political connections.

His tragic assassination cut short his reforms, but his vision for fair governance and social mobility remained influential.

Life Lesson:

• True leadership isn’t just about power—it’s about service. Garfield saw leadership as a way to improve people’s lives, a principle that remains relevant today.

• A strong leader fights for what is right, even if they don’t live to see the change. Many of Garfield’s ideas were enacted after his death, showing that visionary leadership creates lasting impact.

Vocabulary to Learn While Studying the Presidents of the Peak of the Revolution

1. Tariff

·         Definition: A tax imposed on imported goods to protect domestic industries.

·         Sentence: President Harrison’s McKinley Tariff Act raised tariffs, making foreign products more expensive and encouraging Americans to buy domestically produced goods.

2. Assimilation

·         Definition: The process by which immigrants or minority groups adopt the culture and customs of the dominant society.

·         Sentence: Many European immigrants faced pressure to undergo assimilation by learning English and adopting American customs.

3. Political Machine

·         Definition: A political organization that controls votes and government decisions, often through corrupt means.

·         Sentence: The Tammany Hall political machine in New York was known for influencing elections and providing favors in exchange for votes.

4. Populism

·         Definition: A political movement that seeks to represent the interests of ordinary people, often against elites or powerful institutions.

·         Sentence: The Populist Party emerged in the 1890s, advocating for farmers and workers who felt left behind by industrialization.

5. Trust

·         Definition: A legal arrangement where multiple businesses in the same industry are controlled by a single board of trustees to reduce competition.

·         Sentence: The Sherman Antitrust Act aimed to break up trusts that gave too much power to large corporations.

6. Robber Baron

·         Definition: A term used to describe wealthy and powerful industrialists who gained their fortunes through questionable or unethical business practices.

·         Sentence: Critics of John D. Rockefeller called him a robber baron for his ruthless business tactics in the oil industry.

7. Philanthropy

·         Definition: The act of donating money or resources for the public good, often by wealthy individuals.

·         Sentence: Industrialists like Andrew Carnegie practiced philanthropy, funding libraries, schools, and universities.

8. Gold Standard

·         Definition: A monetary system in which a country's currency is backed by gold reserves.

·         Sentence: William McKinley supported the gold standard, arguing that it provided economic stability compared to using silver-backed currency.

9. Progressivism

·         Definition: A reform movement that sought to address the economic and social issues caused by industrialization and corruption.

·         Sentence: While the Progressive Era officially began after 1901, many of its ideas—such as trust-busting and labor rights—grew from the issues faced during the Industrial Revolution.

Engaging Activities to Teach Students About the Industrial Revolution Presidents

Activity #1: Monopoly and the Rise of Big Business

Recommended Age: Grades 6–12

Activity Description: This simulation game helps students understand the impact of monopolies and antitrust laws during the Industrial Revolution by having them participate in a structured business game.

Objective: Students will experience how monopolies form, how competition affects prices, and why the Sherman Antitrust Act (1890) was created to regulate large businesses.

Materials:

• Monopoly board game (or printable money and property cards)

• Extra fake money

• Index cards with roles (business owner, worker, government official)

Instructions:

1. Divide students into small groups, with one player starting as a “monopoly” (controlling multiple properties) while others own only one property.

2. As the game progresses, allow the monopoly player to charge higher rent and buy out competitors.

3. Introduce government intervention by having a student act as a government official, implementing antitrust laws and breaking up monopolies.

4. Discuss how monopolies affected workers, consumers, and businesses during the Industrial Revolution.

Learning Outcome: Students will gain an understanding of corporate power, business ethics, and government regulation, recognizing why policies like the Sherman Antitrust Act were needed.

2. Immigration Storytelling and Ellis Island Roleplay

Recommended Age: Grades 4–10

Activity Description: Students will experience the immigrant journey by adopting the role of an immigrant arriving at Ellis Island in the late 19th century.

Objective: Students will explore the immigration process, challenges, and cultural impact of newcomers to the United States.

Materials:

• Name tags or printable passports with different immigrant names and countries (Italy, Ireland, Germany, Russia, China, etc.)

• Printable Ellis Island Inspection Form (can include medical checks, literacy tests, and job questions)

• Station signs for different parts of the immigration process (Health Check, Legal Check, Employment Office)

Instructions:

1. Assign each student an immigrant identity from a different country.

2. Set up the classroom as Ellis Island, with stations for medical exams, legal questioning, and employment options.

3. Have students go through the process, where some may be approved for entry, while others face delays or rejection.

4. After the roleplay, discuss how immigrants adapted to life in America and faced discrimination or opportunities.

Learning Outcome: Students will develop empathy for immigrants, understanding their struggles and contributions to American society.