Huzza for Commerce!

The emancipatory power of the American hotel


For the women of the mid-19th century, a fine hotel was a perilous place to be. Not only did respectable gentlewomen run the risk of consorting with prostitutes (a popular book of etiquette advised female travelers to keep a safe distance from any broad with "a meretricious expression of eye"), but extended time away from the joys of cooking and cleaning might ruin them for life. One defender of home and hearth described the lady hotel dweller this way: "Idle and lazy, and dyspeptic from the want of exercise, she becomes such a mere puppet and machine that she loses all sense of individual responsibility."

Even if she managed to avoid the whores and dyspepsia, she ran great risk of seduction, possibly by a traveling salesman. And if she contrived to keep her virginity intact, there was always luggage to lose. The detective Allan Pinkerton declared that there was "no more prevalent or more popular branch of dishonesty" than the robbery of inns.

Did hotels really merit such expansive social anxieties? In Hotel: An American History (Yale University Press), the University of New Mexico historian A.K. Sandoval-Strausz responds with an emphatic yes. Hotels, he argues, were "a significant episode in the modern idea of a pluralistic, cosmopolitan society," and conservatives invested in the status quo were right to fear them. Transportation advances granted people a new mobility, and traveling Americans suddenly required social mores not predicated on years of shared community bonds.

Consider the condition of the stranger in mid-18th-century America. "Public authority," writes Sandoval-Strausz, "was deeply invested in policing people's comings and goings." Innkeepers were often required to notify officials when strangers rolled into town, and transients needed official permission to stay for any length of time. In 1765 Boston hired a municipal bouncer of sorts to hunt down unauthorized visitors and send them packing.

One measure of a society's openness to newcomers is the quality of the space it creates for them. Public houses, the inns of the day, offered a rather tepid welcome. They offered an abundance of alcohol and few rooms; when they were crowded, wayfarers might find themselves sharing a bed with a drunken stranger. One traveling Englishman complained of being "sadly tormented with bugs" while in bed. Yet, standards being what they were, he deemed the place "a good inn."

In contrast to the humble taverns they replaced, early hotels were sweeping architectural statements. As plans for the country's first hotel were revealed in 1793, one journalist declared that D.C.'s Union Public House would be "the most magnificent building in America, perhaps in any other country." A year later, construction began on New York's City Hotel, which would feature a ballroom, stores, and the largest circulating library in the nation. Not to be outdone, Boston responded with the Exchange Coffee House, a 200-room building that may have been the nation's largest structure at the time. Alas, the Exchange was not to last: When a fire broke out in the building's attic in 1818, there were no ladders in the city tall enough to reach the flames.

All three ventures were considerable financial risks, and the Union Public House was an abject failure. Nearly all early hotels went bankrupt. But the men who financed these palaces shared an ideology and vocation; every one of them had made a fortune in overseas trade. In a country still 90 percent agrarian, hotels were monuments to the still suspect concepts of commerce and travel and the scions of trade who drove both forward. "In the same way that church architecture emphasized the divine with vertical lines that guided people's gaze skyward and sunlit stained glass that dazzled the eye," writes Sandoval-Strausz, "hotels focused public attention on the benefits of trade and pointed toward a commercial future for the nation."

The men who invested fortunes in these displays of hospitality were not just seeking to edify their fellow Americans. They were bringing symbolic heft to the political debate then raging between Hamiltonian Federalists, who favored commercial expansion, and Jeffersonian Republicans, who favored agricultural self-sufficiency. Hotel builders were almost uniformly Federalists. You could read the towering Exchange Coffee House as a structural middle finger gesturing in the direction of Thomas Jefferson. In case anyone missed the point, one Coffee House Fourth of July celebration featured a play called Huzza for Commerce.

This political maneuvering left hotels vulnerable to charges of elitism, not a popular character trait in the aggressively egalitarian era of Andrew Jackson. But as the national enthusiasm for temporary housing began to mount, these extravagant structures served as engines of social progress. The hotel lobby was a public space that brought together men and women of varied status and purpose; even if you couldn't afford to stay in New York's North American Hotel, you might take a drink at the bar or a meal in the common dining room. By 1830, they had lost their reputation for elitism, and labor newspapers otherwise busy skewering the rich rarely mentioned the commerce-driven habitats in their midst. Indeed, labor groups found their halls to be convenient meeting places.

Which is not to say they went without criticism. Hotels were a new institutional form that upset expectations about the arrangement of daily life and alarmed defenders of domesticity. They were full of beds and liquor, associated with sex, theft, and violence. Guests interacted with no patriarch—only a relatively egalitarian ecosystem of managers, porters, and bellboys. As people began to take longer and longer hotel stays in the mid-19th century, sometimes even living in them, "an entire genre of screeds against hotel living" was born, mourning the decline of traditional gender roles in a world where cooks and maids left women hopelessly idle.

None of this did much to dampen Americans' collective zeal for travel and the institutions that would house them along the way. By the end of the 19th century, the American stranger had a new role in the social order: He was a guest.

Hotels, then and now, are a material manifestation of a world that prizes free mobility and peaceful exchange. "The built environment expresses the values of the people that created it," writes Sandoval-Strausz. In a time when America is spending billions to build a wall along its southern border, this brilliant history is a reminder that the fear of the traveling stranger is something we have overcome before.

Kerry Howley
is a senior editor at Reason.

NEXT: Gary Gygax, 1938-2008

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Interesting. I've seen articles about the growth of the motel industry before (easy to tie into to the auto and highways/interstates, natch), but not hotels.

  2. Poor Kerry. Her article gets sandwiched between two posts about the death of Gary Gygax.

    Pop history always causes one to assume that the hotel in the form of the anonymous inn (think of all fantasy novels, for instance) has always been around and always available. I mean, people had to travel, right? So I found the bit about alerting the authorities to strangers entering town interesting.

  3. She was a hotel detective...

  4. Very nice. One of my favorite descriptions of a hotel room and its connection to freedom etc is in Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale. Unfortunately, my copy is packed away at the moment and I can't dig up the exact lines. But trust me.

  5. when they were crowded, wayfarers might find themselves sharing a bed with a drunken stranger.

    I've found myself sharing a bed with a drunken stranger more than a few times and never thought it was anything to complain about... In fact, it's the sign of a good weekend.

  6. She was a hotel detective...

    thoreau, you've finally started your novel!

  7. libertarian writers must really be out of material at this point

  8. ...but now she's better connected.

  9. Steven Horwitz

    Interesting, one of the the last names in the world I associate with freedom is Margaret Atwood.

  10. I bought 3 different types of Pheromone perfume & each one seems to give me results but I like this one the best because...
    1. It's in an easy spray bottle
    2. Does not have a funky smell as some pheromones do, though this one has a mild perfume, doesn't last long & can be covered by your own perfume brand if its bothersome.

    MY PERSONALITY TYPE: Shy, calm but I do get my share of attention even so haha no but seriously, being attractive helps but isn't enough since I'm the shy type... besides every girl needs more than just being oggled at & being called "sweety" !!! I look way younger than my years, doesn't help at all times.

    RESULTS: THE FIRST DAY I tried this I was going to an art opening & I noticed a couple of things. People actually approached me directly & looked me in the eye as they spoke, they became very chatty. I did have a couple of crazy incidents with men but things like that have happened even otherwise so I didn't think much about it then.
    BUT NOW that I've been using Pheromone for about 3 WEEKS here are a few AHA moments...If you need to know the other products I've tried pls respond here since I'm only leaving a feed back for so far Fav. TRY IT!

  11. A GOOD HOTEL CAN MAKE or break a trip. The worst hotel in the best place is still going to make retiring after a long day an unfortunate experience. The best hotel in the worst place, on the other hand, can be something of an oasis. Take the best hotels and put them in the best places, and you've got a private slice of the vacation you've always dreamed of.

    Here are 24 absolutely epic dream hotels.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.