My next piece of evidence also suggests that Salt was an entrepreneur, the evidence I will be using are the houses Salt got built for his workers and people who lived in Saltaire. Titus got houses built for ‘his’ people from which he earned a lot of money because he made them pay rent. Now, one would question themselves asking whether getting rent from people is an entrepreneurial act or not. One can also suggest that this act was more philanthropist (generous) then entrepreneurial, but I object!
Even though putting a roof over people’s heads was a philanthropist act the fact that he made them pay rent was not, because at the end of the day his name was crawling further higher in the list of the worlds richest. If Salt was considered so generous then I am sure he would have put a roof over people’s heads free of charge, after all he was a very rich man.
One could even question why he did not do so because if you look at it the way I am; The people were earning him lots of money through working for him anyway, so to say “thank you” the lest Salt could do was give them houses free of charge. What would there be to lose?
My next piece of evidence which shows that Salt was an entrepreneur are his money making mills. Salt gained a huge amount of money through his one mill in which due to great success he consolidated five more. The fact that he did this made him the largest employee in Bradford and because of this he was made Britain’s richest man!
Now, during this time he was obviously at the peak of his profession, one would question whether he did anything philanthropical. Well, even though Salt’s blood was entrepreneurial there was a little amount which flowed though his veins which wanted to help people. Now and again Salt did help ‘his’ people out.
First of all Salt built a dining hall for his workers where suitable hot food was served. Salt got the dining hall built right opposite the mill so that his workers did not have to travel far. They could go to the dining hall and have their meal there and if they had money then they could purchase food from there. The idea of having a dining hall opposite the mill prevented workers for beginning work in the afternoon late. The dining hall costed Salt £3,600. Was this a philanthropist act or were there any ulterior motives? As the coursework progresses you will be able to see exactly what I am on about.
My next piece of evidence also suggests that Salt genuinely cared for people is the fact that he got a park made for them. This park costed a lot of money even though there was no personal gain for Salt. The park had a boathouse, river for bathing, cricket and croquet ground, Bowling Green and alcoves to sit out of the sun or rain.
The purpose of the park was so the people and workers had open space to relax and basically just improve health and their quality of life. The fact that Salt had no gain though making the park just shows that there is one piece of evidence which JUST suggest that he was philanthropist. But then again, why would Salt want to make the people pay just to go in or out of a local park. What was he going to do, make it private in order for people to pay?!....No!
Even though I am confidently saying that the only reason the park was made was out of shear love, do you think someone could prove me wrong? I do not, and I will not know what went through Salt’s mind when he thought of producing a park for the people but through the evidence I have researched though all I can say is that the act was philanthropical.
My following piece evidence also suggest that Salt was a philanthropist because of the fact that he got a church built for the people. At that time it was called; ‘The Congregational Church,’ but now has been changed to ‘The United Reformed Church.’ It was built for the people, so in time of need they had somewhere to go to. Something which I felt was a philanthropist act was when I came to know that whenever Salt visited the church he sat amongst the people. I felt it was a very philanthropist act because I came to know that Salt did not look down to the people in fact he respected them just the way they respected him. Even though Salt was wealthier than the people and had a much higher status then any of them he kept his feet on the ground, to an extent, obviously!
Salt did not charge any one when coming into the church, maybe he felt a little selfish if he did so? Then again, one would question why he would want people to pay just to worship God, who is Salt to come in-between God and his people! The clever thing is that he did not charge because if he did then he would have been seen as a money hungry business man and I am more than sure he would not want that image.
During this coursework I have argued both ends of the spectrum, saying that Salt was an entrepreneur and then saying that he was a philanthropist. But now the tables are about to turn because now I will argue the real thing, the fact that Salt was both, an entrepreneur and a philanthropist. It can be said that he had an entrepreneurial approach to opportunities he saw but the only image that was projected only suggested a philanthropical act. Salt was a risky business man even though good at heart. On the other hand one could say Salt was “Too good to be true?”
If a person believed that Sir Titus Salt was nothing but a man of great energy, determination, prudence and generosity then my quote following this will prove just how generous Salt was considered;
“Great philanthropist who used his wealth for the benefit of his followers.”
This quote is very bias because it’s a philanthropist quote suggesting that Salt was a really pure hearted man when really he was not that pure!
Now, it is up an individual to believe whether Sir Titus Salt was either a philanthropist or an entrepreneur, but I will argue that he was both because I believe every person does do good but with intensions in which they see their own personal gain. So, as can be seen from the discussion above there are many things that Titus Salt did which could be used to support either viewpoint. For example, when Salt got the dining hall made he had a hidden motive behind it as well as the obvious reason for having it built.
Since most of the workers came from Shipley they obviously travelled a lot to and back from their homes. Sometimes the workers got late to work due to traffic or just the fact that from the mill to their homes was such a great distance that they could not help it. This annoyed Salt and so he thought about trying to figure out how he could make the workers more punctual. This was resolved in the production of a dining hall just opposite the mill.
That hidden motive in having a dining hall right opposite is the fact that every worker gets to lunch on time and comes back to work on time. This meant Salt was much happier and better productivity. But, even though he had this hidden motive the workers just gave him an image of generosity because they did not seem to understand his clever ideas, not just that but the workers at that time were also illiterate. It could be said that they were also too naïve to understand his entrepreneurial ways of thinking.
I do believe that Salt helped people out but I also believe that he had hidden motives and he did have a hunger to earn money and to live life in luxury. For example; Salt was always a keen supporter of education he always thought that education was the key to success, which he quite rightly thought because I believe the same. Salt wanted to educate the younger generation and so he got a school built, it was designed by Lockwood and Mawson and had an Italian touch.
Due to having built a school Salt gained in two ways, one being entrepreneurial and the other philanthropical. The entrepreneurial gain was the fact that his future ‘workers’ would be at a high level of intellectual knowledge than the ones he worked with before. They will be much more understanding and will make Salt reach much higher sky’s! Basically Salt will be able to expand his horizons, and the outcome of that would be so simple; he would become even richer!
On the other hand the philanthropical gain was the fact that he had been known as a man who cared for the young children, he was as good as a role model, and people could have even wanted to be him because they thought that he was a positive man who cared for everything.
Could he have been compared to Jesus? I say this because even though I know Salt was an entrepreneur all the workers saw was a man who wanted to help people, a man who used his wealth to help others, someone who did not think of himself so superior. But on the other hand it can also be said that the workers were not educated enough to see his hidden motives, so even though I am asking whether he was compared to Jesus or not will always remain a mystery, I guess.
Although we can not be certain on saying whether Salt was or was not an entrepreneur or a philanthropist; the evidence above does suggest that he was both. A quotation that puts me in doubt about Salt is the quotation;
“Too good to be true?”
Could this be the case, could Salt have been a fake just a money greedy business who time to time, seeing his benefit helped out ‘his’ people. To be honest I believe that there has not been a man nor woman who has stepped onto this earth just for the sake of helping others (excluding Mother Teresa!), I mean, of course people help other people, but I am sure that they do feel they should get something back from helping. I am sure there is a little thought in the back of their heads, them wanting something in return of their help.
It will never be possible to know what Salt thought or even how he thought but I do know that he had two reasons for building an infirmary (hospital.) One of which being quite obvious; to help people who were injured but the entrepreneurial reason was so the people could be cured early and easily and so they could get back to work soon as possible. I believe that this act was an entrepreneurial act because he could have let the people get cured by time and then come and work but Salt told them to go to the infirmary because the medicine was all provided and the time to recover was cut down, which meant that the workers could go back to work early and carry on making Salt richer!
On the other hand the fact that I will support for providing the philanthropical fact of building an infirmary is that Salt did care about his workers and if injured that he wanted to help them and make sure they got the right attention given to them.
So, as I have done above, I have proved that Sir Titus Salt was a risky business man (entrepreneur) but also cared for people. (Philanthropist) To be honest I have realized how Salt did things for the gain for both ‘sides.’ If you look at it though my perspective then I feel that in real life during Salt’s life it was always the case of philanthropy Vs entrepreneurial!
The discussion above shows that the quote;
“Saltaire was solely built for the enjoyment of the workers?”
Could be argued both ways.
The village was built for Salt to make money and for people who came from Bradford to restart there life. This was because at that time Bradford was in a bad state, it was so bad that people started to predict life expectancies. Salt wanted an alternative to Bradford and this is where the idea for creating Saltaire took place.
At the end of the day Salt did help himself and others during his life, but the fact will still remain that he built and worked with things and people for two reasons. On each of his buildings on the site there are examples of ulterior motives, because basically none of his buildings were built just for one reason. I think that the reason behind Salt’s success was his ‘plan.’ Now, what I mean by saying this is that I am more than certain that Salt had everything planned from day one, how he could create his mills and by whom.
It is a fact that his father taught him from a young age that the main priority in life should be to create money. This ‘dream’ of his fathers he did fulfil alongside gain an image which to be quite honest with you is well respected world wide.
Whether one believes that the image was well deserved or not, I will leave it to that. But something which I will say is that even though Salt had self gains in the majority of his work, he did help ‘his’ people out. He never let them feel as though he was superior, it can be said that he was a down to earth type of a man. But, even though I say this, I do not fully agree with the quote that will end this piece of work because I believe that the quote suggests that Salt was a philanthropist and nothing else and I do not agree with that!
“Great philanthropist who used his wealth for the benefit of others.”
Shalina Jelani
10pt
