Chapter II: The Alleged General Discontent

The workmen of our country, it is true, want better times, cheaper clothing, the doing away with trusts, and many other desirable changes; but far more than this, they feel the need of the absolute crushing out of the last vestige of “caste.” They at last realize that “caste” is a crime; and the common people have, at heart, no sympathy with criminals, and especially criminals of that class. The common people stay at home, work hard, and very seldom have need to “go to Canada,” or take a flying trip to Southern Europe. Their sins are mainly those of passion. At their best, they are kindly disposed to their fellows; but they are _human_. They feel a snub from their employer or employer’s son as keenly as their honest, hard-working wives and daughters feel the haughty stare and condescending patronage of Madame Crœsus and her bejewelled daughters. Here we offer our readers some explanations, given by the common, average American citizen, for the defeat of the Republican party at the polls on November 5th. The article is taken from the pages of the New York _Tribune_, November 21, 1892, the official organ of the Republican Vice-Presidential candidate, and therefore entitled to more than ordinary consideration. The article is headed “The General Discontent.”

It consists of talks with the people about the recent election in New York State and Vermont. It is, largely, the observations of a correspondent who has walked through the State, asking farmers and workingmen why they voted for Cleveland. Let it not be forgotten that Whitelaw Reid is the editor of this paper.

“The politician who attempts to explain defeat is ‘crying over
spilt milk.’ The newspaper which tells ‘how it was done’ is
‘whining.’ The writer of a political obituary has hardly an
enviable task. A defeated party is supposed to accept with
philosophical resignation the rejection of pet policies, and with
the calmness of the fatalist, tell itself that it ‘was to have
been.’ The reasons given for the result of the recent election
are as numerous as there are differences in the minds of the two
parties. Some say that the desire for free trade is the cause of
the Republican overthrow. Others, that the thing that did it is
the McKinley bill; others again, that the people want the ‘repeal
of the Bank Tax law’; but to him that looks beneath the surface,
there is ample evidence that the defeat of the Republican party is
not mainly due to the ‘unpopularity’ of its candidates, nor to the
love which the people are said to bear for Grover Cleveland; not
to the McKinley bill, nor to any ‘desire on the part of the people
for free trade;’ not because free silver is or is not wanted.
Not through the ‘superb generalship’ of the Democratic National
Committee was a victory gained, nor was the battle lost through
the ‘lamentable incompetency’ of the Republican leaders. The chief
cause of Republican defeat and Democratic victory is the modern
tendency toward socialism.

“This statement by no means implies that the socialistic
propaganda has taken a firm hold upon the citizen of the United
States, or that its tenets have but to be sowed in American soil
to bear an abundant harvest. The people have not subscribed to
the mild doctrines of Henry George, nor to the more radical and
incendiary plans of John Burns, nor do they place confidence
in the ability or stability of the leaders of the ‘New Order
of Things.’ They have not the slightest desire to overturn
existing government; the ravings of the Anarchists they repudiate
altogether.

“But since 1873, on Black Friday, political and social conditions
in the United States have been those of unquiet and discontent
among certain thousands. The Greenback party then had its origin.
It is within the last decade, however, that social discontent has
manifested itself more markedly in the formation of political
parties, all of which, according to the leaders of them, were
destined to glorious futures, when the Democratic and Republican
parties should be wiped out of existence.

“This unsettled state of affairs showed itself in the formation of
the Greenback party, the Labor party, the Socialistic party, the
Farmers’ Alliance, and, finally in the People’s party.

THE RISE OF THE PEOPLE’S PARTY.

“The true reason for the formation of the Alliance, or People’s
party, in the North, West, and South, is not difficult to find.
When the tide of immigration and settlement turned toward the
great wheat and corn fields of Iowa, Nebraska, North and South
Dakota, every natural condition was favorable to the growing of
abundant crops, which brought the farmer a golden return for his
labor. But beginning with 1884 the crops in many sections of the
Northwest were failures. This unfavorable condition lasted until
1890, when a great demand for cereals from Europe, and enormous
crops harvested in America, turned the flood of prosperity back
again to the farmer, who had for six years suffered because of
poor crops. During these years of hard times the farmer had
encumbered himself with numerous and necessary debts, so that
the profits of the prosperous years of 1890 and 1891, as well as
those of this year, have gone in payment of accrued interest
and the liquidation, in part, of a vast mortgage indebtedness.
After having been obliged to stint himself for several years,
it is but natural that when a chance presented itself he should
desire to surfeit upon the plenty, rather than be obliged because
of his indebtedness to pay out the first money which had come to
him from several years of toil to those whom he owed. It is but
natural, too, under such conditions, that he should have embraced
a project which, as he understood it, was to lift the burden from
his shoulders and put it upon the back of the Government, to make
money ‘easy,’ and to render indebtedness not a hardship, but
rather something which might be wiped out as easily as it could be
incurred.

THE DISCONTENT IN THE EAST.

“The result in Wisconsin shows clearly that the wounds received
in the battle over the Bennet law had not yet healed, and the
agitation over the repeal of the Edwards law is the cause of
Republican disaster in Illinois; but no such issues as perverted
the minds of Republicans in the Northwest, and in Wisconsin and
Illinois, were matters of controversy in the old line Republican
States of Ohio and New Hampshire.

“The political veteran who has battled in these States for many
campaigns is puzzled where to seek the cause of such overwhelming
disaster. To cry ‘boodle’ is to bring ridicule upon the party, but
to give the McKinley bill as the only or main cause is to show
only a superficial knowledge of the existing condition of affairs.

“To find out why the people voted as they did, one must ask
them. It is they that have piled up these great majorities, and,
seemingly, have repudiated Republican doctrines, and put the seal
of disapproval upon what the Republican party believes has given
this country unexampled prosperity. Let any man who believes
that the ‘popularity’ of Grover Cleveland, the demand for free
trade, or any policy which is shown in the Democratic platform,
other than that which embodies the general statement that the
Democrats will give the country better times, is the cause of
Republican defeat, ask the people why they voted as they did, and
he will find that it is this tendency, unconscious and entirely
undeveloped, toward socialism which has given the Democrats
victory. It is not permanent nor lasting, so far as it exists in
seeming antagonism to Republican policies. In 1896 a cyclone of
disapproving votes is just as likely to sweep over the Democratic
camp as it has this year devastated the Republican stronghold.

“But it is one thing to make a statement, and another to prove
it. In order to ascertain what it was that brought defeat to the
Republican party, I took a trip through the States of New York and
Vermont, and in five days interviewed several hundred laboring
people and men who are in business in a small way in various
mercantile pursuits, and who voice the opinion and sentiments of
thousands in similar walks of life. Talk with many was profitless.
They had nothing against President Harrison, nothing in particular
that they knew of against Protection. They did not vote the
Democratic ticket because they were impressed with the greatness
of Mr. Cleveland, or with the soundness of his views, or with the
policy of the party as presented in the Chicago platform. They
said they wanted better times and more money. They wanted cheaper
clothing, cheaper fuel, cheaper everything; but they wanted to
sell what they had to sell, whether it be labor or goods, at the
highest possible price. They did not, because they could not, deny
that the country as a whole had grown vastly prosperous under
Republican administrations.

“They were not sure that the McKinley bill or previous tariffs had
had anything to do with the hard times which they declared exist.
The laborer could not say but what the cost of store articles had
decreased largely in the last quarter of a century. In fact, many
of them could remember when articles of common consumption and
use cost much more than they do to-day; while the products of the
farmer and the stocks of the shopkeeper, so the farmer and the
tradesman were obliged to affirm, were sold not many years ago at
a lower price and with less profit than to-day.

“The farmers acknowledge that perhaps the elements may have had
something to do with poor crops, that the opening of the vast
farming territory of the Northwest, and the inexorable enforcement
of the law of supply and demand, may have had something of a
disastrous effect upon the farmers of the East. But these were not
looking for reasons. They did not want reasons. They did not wish
to consider causes. They did not think that they and their affairs
have anything to do with causes, effects, policies, or platforms.
All they know is that times are bad--with them. All they want
is better times. ‘Figures don’t prove anything,’ they say. ‘We
are hard up, and have been for years; we do not know what causes
hard times, nor do we care, if the future only brings prosperity.
The Republicans are in power, and have been since 1862, with the
exception of four years; therefore, if they have not given and
cannot give us better times, who can but the Democrats? We are
going to try them.’

“This is what a part of that vote which gave the Democratic
majority in New York thought. They would have voted just as
readily for Populist, Prohibition, or Socialist candidates
had they thought that any of these parties had the power to
better their condition. But this element was not large enough
alone to give Mr. Cleveland a majority in New York State. It
was the smaller tradesman, the farmer, and the laborer. These
are the ones, and such the element whose vote gave success to
the Democratic party, and in voting thus they had no intention
of rejecting any particular Republican, or of approving any
particular Democratic policy.

AN EXAMPLE OF POPULAR REASONING.

“A tailor who lives in a little town not far from Albany, and
whose entire stock in trade does not amount in value to the
cost of one bolt of goods owned by his more fashionable brother
who does business in Broadway, voted on November 8th his first
Democratic ticket. I asked him why he did so, after having voted
for four Republican candidates, and having all his life approved
the Republican policy of Protection. He said: ‘I voted for Mr.
Cleveland, not for anything Mr. Cleveland or the Democratic party
have done, but rather for what he and his party have said they
would do. Nor did I vote against Mr. Harrison because I do not
like him, nor against the Republican party because it has always
stood for Protection, but more with a view of making an experiment
than anything else. I do not believe that times are good with a
majority of people; I know they are not with me. This does not
seem to be the day for the man who is in business in a small way.
I don’t know anything about the condition of affairs in free-trade
England, but I know that here we have Standard Oil trusts, a sugar
trust, a rubber trust, and a trust in almost every line, and if a
small dealer attempts to compete with a large dealer, the weaker
man is crushed. The great clothing company, with its millions of
capital, undersells me, and I am compelled to meet its prices or
go out of business and get into something else.

“‘All the business of the country seems to be getting into
the hands of a few people and a few big corporations. I don’t
like such a state of affairs. I don’t want to be crushed out
of existence for attempting to compete with the millionaire
clothing dealer. In order to live and conduct my business I must
make a profit on my goods. I do not say that the tariff or that
any Republican legislation is responsible for this condition of
affairs. It may be that no legislation can eradicate the evil, but
legislation certainly can prohibit trusts.

“‘What I do know is that I, and such men as I am, cannot do
business in competition with these combinations of capital. What
I want is a living. In this I am not unreasonable; the world owes
me a living, but I am willing to work and work hard to get it. All
that I want is a fair chance. Maybe I made a mistake when I voted
the Democratic ticket. Perhaps Protection is just what we have
needed and yet need. Perhaps Free-Trade will make things better. I
don’t know how this is, but when I voted I was willing to run my
chances in order to find out. I am a Republican still, and if the
Democrats cannot make things better I shall try to take life as it
comes and do the best I can.’

“This is, in a measure, the reasoning of most of the smaller
tradesmen. They want better times; they want centralization
of capital done away with; they want trusts prohibited, and
combinations of all kinds destroyed. They want more money, money
more easily obtained, with a less rate of interest.

“The intelligent laborer is giving much thought to the condition
of himself and his fellows. He is as yet not enough of a student
to dive into theories, to analyze policies; nor is he able, at
the present, to plan for himself any legislation which shall
better his condition. A group of laborers, some of whom worked
on the railroad and some in the quarries, in Washington County,
acknowledged to me that they voted on the 8th of November, for
the first time, the Democratic ticket. I was not able, after
exhaustive questioning, to get from any one of them a reason
why he had voted as he had done. The answer one gave me is the
answer all gave: He wanted less hours of work, better pay,
cheaper necessities. A boss of one of the gangs of quarrymen,
a man who in his time had been a day laborer himself, a person
of good, hard common sense, an out-and-out Republican, told me
that, although the men under him had always before voted the
Republican ticket, so far as he knew, yet at this election they
had voted for Cleveland, more because they were dissatisfied with
their condition, to a certain extent, and the Republicans were in
power, and because the Democrats had repeatedly made the general
statement that their policies would bring good times, when the
laborer should work few hours for large pay, the necessities of
life be much cheaper than they are to-day, and the luxuries of the
rich taxed to support the general government.

“‘I tried to reason with them,’ said the boss; ‘but you might
as well have tried to reason with a drove of mules, they are so
stubborn. I told them they might better leave well enough alone;
that the country had never been so prosperous as it was to-day;
that wages were good, and that the cost of store articles had been
steadily decreasing for years, and had never been so low as they
were to-day. But no, they did not believe that; they did not want
to believe it; they said they were overworked; that they were not
getting good pay--although their wages have never been larger--and
they want, well, I don’t believe any one of them can tell what he
does want. They said the Republican party was in power and times
were not good, and if the Democrats were able to make good times,
why, they wanted them in power and would vote the Democratic
ticket.’

OBSERVATIONS OF ONE WHO VOTED THE REPUBLICAN TICKET.

“A shoemaker in the town of Granville, Washington County, a good
deal of a philosopher in his way, with plenty of good horse-sense
showing in his rugged face, a man whose language was refined,
and whose conversation showed him to be a reader as well as
a reasoner, gave me the best exposition of the causes of the
Republican defeat that I have yet heard anyone make. ‘I am a
Republican,’ said he; ‘I always have been and I always shall be. I
hoped the party would win, but yet when I talked with the people
around this place, and in other towns which I sometimes visit,
those people who do a great deal of thinking, and who vote as
their reason, wrong or right, tells them to vote, I was mightily
afraid the fight would go against us. I do not think very much
of Anarchistic ideas, or of the theories of the Socialist, nor
of the golden promises made by Weaver and the People’s party. No
human being can ever make a paradise out of this world, and at no
one time will everyone in it be satisfied and happy. This nation
of ours has grown so rapidly, and there are so many foreigners
here who have become citizens, and we print so many cheap and
silly books, that I am not surprised that the Republican party was
defeated. If a party of angels had made up the Government, the
result would have been just the same. The same causes that led to
Republican defeat in 1892 will overthrow the Democratic Government
in 1896. Ever since the Greenback party was started, and ever
since the Socialistic and the hundred other ’istic’ agitators have
been telling the people how they are abused, how they are robbed,
that the rich are growing richer and the poor poorer, everything
has been in such an unsettled condition that I do not wonder at
the result of the election. It could not have been otherwise.

“‘I believe the Administration has been everything it should be;
that General Harrison has been a splendid President; that his
policy has been for the good of the people; but I don’t believe
that the best man that ever lived, if he had been a Republican
and in power, could have been elected to the Presidency of the
United States this year. Up in all this section of the country,
and throughout the State, for that matter, the man who had always
before voted the Republican ticket in an independent way cast a
Democratic ballot, more because he wanted to make an experiment
than anything else. It is funny how unreasonable people are. They
don’t sit down and calmly figure for themselves, but they jump
at conclusions, and because with some of us times are hard, they
don’t stop to think who or what is responsible. I was talking
with just such a man only the other day. He was hard up, so he
claimed, but I know he has been doing business here ever since I
can remember, and has always lived and looked and acted just about
the same as he does now. He keeps a store. As near as I could get
at it, he wanted to sell everything he had to sell at a good deal
better price than it is fetching now, but he wanted everybody else
to sell to him what stuff he wanted to buy a good deal cheaper
than what he is paying for it now. He would not listen to me when
I told him that that is what everybody else wants to do; to buy
everything cheap and sell everything dear; but I told him that if
people did not buy until they could get things at their own price,
or sell until they could sell things at their own figure, it would
take but a mighty little while for everybody to starve to death.
He said he was going to vote the Democratic ticket just to see
what would happen in the next four years.

“‘Many of the quarrymen bring their boots here to be mended. They
tell me they want more money and fewer work hours. They have not
much of an idea how they are going to get them, other than that
the Democrats have told them that if Cleveland was elected they
would get what they wanted and everybody would be happy.

“‘Therefore, they voted the Democratic ticket. But, I believe,’
continued the shoemaker, ‘that after all this election will turn
out mighty well for the Republican party. In the end, the new
way of voting is going to help us. Before this the boss or the
politician could take his men or his gang and vote them as he
wished. Now this is, to a certain extent, changed. The half-way
independent man who before was led to the polls and voted, goes
to the polls and votes for himself. Before this he was part of
the machine, gave election matters but little thought, and was
enthusiastic only because others were so. Now, he must either vote
blindly or he must think for himself, and in the end he is going
to think it out and is going to do the right thing. He will then
see that the Republican policy has been and is for his benefit;
that it has contributed more than any other one thing to make this
country great and prosperous, and the people happy and contented.’

“One of the head workmen in a Troy factory possesses similar
ideas. He is a man of more than ordinary intelligence, and says
that many of his acquaintances voted the Democratic ticket more
because they were uneasy and wanted something, they did not know
what, than because they had any particular liking for Cleveland
and the Democracy, or dislike for Harrison and the Republican
party. This opinion is held by many of the skilled workmen of
the factories in both Albany and Troy, and in the smaller towns
between New York and Plattsburg.

A FARMER’S REASONS FOR HIS VOTE.

“It was a more difficult matter to get any Republican farmer to
acknowledge that he voted the Democratic ticket. One was finally
found who admitted that he had.

“‘What were your reasons?’ I asked.

“‘Well, I don’t know as I can exactly tell you,’ he answered; ‘we
have not had a very easy time of it, we farmers, for the last
eight or ten years.’

“‘But don’t you think,’ said I, ‘that the opening of the farming
lands in the West has a great deal to do with the decrease of farm
values in the East?’

“‘Well, perhaps so,’ he replied. ‘It is hard for a man who is not
a political economist and who doesn’t make a business of keeping
track of such things to give any reason for the hard times, or to
choose between the reasons given by Democrats and Republicans.
So far as I know, the Republican party has always kept its
promises made to the farmers. Since the McKinley tariff we have
been getting better prices for our potatoes and other produce in
Northern New York, for before, we had not been able to compete
with Canada. Yet, we don’t make much of a living, even at this.
You say that statistics prove that this country, as a Nation, is
vastly more prosperous than any other, and that we are a good deal
richer than we were ten years ago; yet I am not any better off,
and most of the farmers around here are not any better off, and
I made up my mind that if, as the Democrats promise, a change of
Administration would make good times, why, I wanted a change; if
Free Trade will make things better, I want Free Trade; if State
banks will give us money, and more of it, I want State banks put
on equal terms with National banks. If these changes are brought
about, it may make things a good deal worse than they are now. At
any rate, I am willing to try it. If I find that the Democrats
have deceived me, in 1896 I shall vote the Republican ticket
again.’

“These interviews show the state of mind among people who are
enough in number to turn overwhelmingly a majority for either the
Republican or the Democratic party. In them is ample evidence
that the people whose votes defeated the Republican party are
not dissatisfied with Republican administration of affairs. They
do not charge that the McKinley bill, or that the financial
or any other Republican policy is responsible for hard times,
nor is there any testimony which can be taken as evidence that
the ‘unbounded popularity’ of Grover Cleveland or the (by the
Democrats so called) broad financial and economic policy of that
party, has brought about this sweeping victory. A talk with the
independent voter shows, first, that there exists among the
smaller tradesmen, among those whose votes turn the tide toward
victory or toward defeat, dissatisfaction because, as they claim,
they are unable to compete with combinations of capital; they want
decentralization of capital, and trusts prohibited by law and the
law enforced.

“A condition of affairs exists, the dissatisfied tradesman claims,
in which he cannot earn a living. The Republican party was in
power, and had been, with the exception of four years, for a
quarter of a century, and while it possibly may not be responsible
for trusts and for the centralization of wealth and capital, yet
the tradesmen says, ‘I cast my vote for Cleveland and Democracy to
make an experiment, the result of which I am willing to take the
consequences of.’

“The workingman was influenced to vote for Democracy more because
he had been repeatedly told that all rich men and manufacturers
are Republicans than for anything else. Capital, of late years,
has been denounced so severely, and strikes, the cause of many
of which are hard to determine, have of late been so frequent
(fortunately for the Democratic party, because by these strikes
Democratic speakers were able falsely to claim that they were
caused by the attempt of the rich Republicans to crush the
workingman, and because by the shortness of the campaign the
Republicans were unable effectively to disprove these Democratic
statements) that the Republican party, although its policy of
protection was approved by the labor union leaders, has been in a
measure handicapped.

“The independent farmer voted the Democratic ticket because the
prices of farm products are not up to the figure he thinks they
should be, and because the Democrats have told him that their
financial and economic policies, if carried out, will enhance the
value of his farm products, give him the markets of the world, and
greatly decrease the cost of the necessities of life, although he
cannot disprove that this state of affairs does not exist to-day,
almost wholly because of a protective tariff.

GREAT NUMBERS OF NEW CITIZENS.

“But there is another element, and one which always has and
always will contribute to Democratic success. Naturalization was
unusually large this year; the citizen of foreign birth is a power
in the land and the Democratic party was felicitously named. There
is something in the word ‘Democracy’ which appeals strongly to
the citizen of foreign birth. In this country ‘Democracy,’ as
applied to the Democratic party, signifies to them that have left
their homes in Europe, a party of the people in contradistinction
to plutocracy and to aristocracy, the party of wealth and the
party of people of noble birth. That this has weight with a
certain foreign element is conclusively shown in the statement
made by several foreign laborers in Washington County. Their
knowledge of things American is not sufficient for them to grasp
the import of the policies advocated by either party, and hence
it is that they vote for the party whose name means the most to
them. From a talk with many of them I am convinced that it is a
natural antagonism toward the party in power, a love for the word
‘Democracy’ that caused not a few newly made citizens to vote for
Mr. Cleveland. One of them told me that the Republican party was
made up of bankers, of great manufacturers, of men who had formed
combinations for the purpose of advancing the cost of necessities
of life--the party, in fact, to which every one who has money
belongs. In other words, that to be a Republican is to be a
capitalist, and to be a Democrat is to be a man of the people:
that by voting the Democratic ticket the power could be taken from
the capitalist and put into the hands of the people, and that the
people ruling the people would mean legislation which would give
the greatest good to the greatest number.

“A talk with the people shows further that the Republican party
is still very much in existence; that its defeat in this election
does not mean a rebuke for anything that it has ever done, nor
for any policy which it advocates, but it means that unless
the Democratic party makes good the promise which it has given
to bring about better times, it will meet with a defeat more
overwhelming than that which overturned and shattered Republican
hopes in 1892, and that the Democrats will not only lose the
States which have gone from the Republican ranks this year, but
that West Virginia, South Carolina, Alabama, and Louisiana will
turn from their allegiance to Democracy, cast their vote either
for a third party, for fusion, or for the Republicans, and for
future years make what is now known as the Solid South nothing but
a mournful Democratic memory.”

Through the whole of these interviews, when attention is directed to the subject, it becomes perfectly apparent that the thread of the story is the people’s objection to the prevalence of social distinction among them. It is half expressed in nearly every one of these interviews, while they hesitate to put it in words; possibly because they highly appreciate that as the motive that so powerfully moved them on November the 8th. And then again, because of their hesitancy in expressing their recognition, even, of the attempt on the part of those possessed of greater wealth, to assume social superiority of those less fortunate.