Download Chapter 20 Party Politics in an Era of Upheaval 1877 to 1884

Chapter 20: Politics and Expansion in an Industrializing
Age, 1877-1900
*How did the fight between the Stalwarts and Half-Breeds lead to the assassination of
James A. Garfield?
--The political scene that dominated the last quarter of the 19th century was one that
was more concerned with the spoils of office than actually doing their jobs. Garfield’s
nomination of the Republican ticket in 1880 split the Republican Party into two separate
factions, the Stalwarts and the Half-Breeds (both sides fought over which side received
the best government jobs). Garfield, a Stalwart, won the election; a little known
Stalwart Charles Guiteau expected to be rewarded with a government job for his
support of the new president. When this job did not materialize, Guiteau became
convinced that Garfield’s death was a “political necessity”. He shot the president in the
back as he boarded a train; many mourned Garfield as a martyr of the Gilded Age (a
more accurate portrayal is that Garfield was the epitome of what was wrong with the
Gilded Age and that his death was a small step away from the corrupted politics of the
era).
*What were the bases of power for both the Democrats and Republicans from 1877 to
1894?
--As is commonly discussed in today’s society, each of the political parties had bases of
power that they could depend on during the election season:
a. Democrats: Composed of Southerners, immigrants, and Catholics. Common beliefs
included the idea that the best policy was a “minimal” federal government, temperance
was a crime (mostly a defense for the immigrant population), and bilingual schools.
Regional locations included the South, Border States (especially Ohio), and large
industrial cities.
b. Republicans: Composed of the working class Protestants, big businesses, blacks, and
former Civil War veterans. Common beliefs included paying for the contribution of
Union soldiers, reminding voters that they won the Civil War, support of limits on
prostitution, alcohol consumption, and religious attendance. Regional locations
included rural New England, Pennsylvania, and the Upper Midwest.
*Describe the characteristics of voter participation in the late 19 th century.
--Despite the virtual disregard by the federal government, the Gilded Age marked the
high point in voter participation in the history of the United States; on average more
than 80 percent of eligible voters took part in national elections and the number was
near 95 percent in closely contested states. The reasoning behind the high voter
turnout, despite the lack of assistance by the federal government, was the motives used
by both political parties to create programs that produced loyalty amongst its
constitutes. Additionally, the economic concerns of the era convinced many “ordinary”
Americans that voting was the only protection against policies that would hurt their
ability to survive financially.
*Why did politicians generally ignore the social consequences of industrialization in
the late 19th century?
--The federal government’s attention regarding the rapid growth of industrialization was
focused squarely on its economic consequences, not the social factors. A major reason
for this philosophy was the belief in a laissez-faire approach towards business. In others
words, the federal government should allow the major industries to go unregulated
because this self-interest provided the best possible outcome for progress. Instead,
most Americans looked towards their local or state governments to deal with grievances
involving industrialization; the goal of the federal government was simply to promote
business.
*Describe the Republican political vision at the end of the 19 th century.
--The Republican Party molded a political vision that was based in large part of their
experiences during the Civil War and Reconstruction. The Republicans believed in the
use of the high tariff to promote American business, a strong commitment to paying
pensions for widows of Union soldiers, and a strong belief in the rights of women to
become wage earners in the industrial market. Additionally, men in the Republican
Party (perhaps because of the victory in the Civil War) promoted the party as one of
masculine appeal. All of these characteristics came to blend into the Republican belief
that their program protected the American family.
*Describe the Democratic political vision at the end of the 19 th century.
--Much of the Democratic political vision was a rebuttal to the Republican vision. The
Democrats, never fans of abolition, believed that the industrial world (with free blacks)
was a threat to the American family. They characterized the high tariff as an example of
the excess of government. To the Democrats, the Republican vision was a threat to the
American family and a vote for their party was a vote to protect the American ideal.
*What examples of voter fraud were present at the end of the 19 th century?
--The massive influx of immigrants, the corruption of political machines, and the
willingness of both political parties to win at all costs produced serious voter fraud
during the Gilded Age:
1. Rigging elections
2. Throwing out opposing votes
3. Paying “floaters” to move from precinct to precinct to vote multiple times
*What was the major question involving the money supply during the 1870s?
--The money question would dominate the period from 1877-1900. The major question
facing economists and the federal government was how to create an adequate money
supply for a rapidly growing economy without producing inflation. The debate focused
on either the use of gold or silver (or both), since that was considered the only confident
form of tender during this period.
*What were the opposing views on the money question in the 1870s?
--As is to be expected there were strong arguments for the use of either gold or silver
during this period. Bankers, creditors, business leaders, economists, and politicians
believed that economic stability could only be achieved through the use of a strict
money supply, thus supporting the use of the gold standard, which would limit the
amount of currency in circulation. Those in debt, specifically farmers in the South and
West, want a large money supply so that they could remove this from debt, thus
supporting a bimetallist system that would increase the currency. The argument over
the policy was only increased with the fact that “greenbacks” used during the Civil War
were still in circulation; the federal government was faced with the decision to either
retain the currency or have it phased out. This argument, during the Panic of 1873, led
to the formation of the Greenback Party that supported an expanded money supply,
health regulations in the workplace, and benefits for workers and farmers. The party
successfully won 14 seats in Congress during the midterm elections of 1878, but the
subsequent prosperity led to a drop in their effectiveness and more calls for a restricted
monetary supply.
*What was the significance of the Sherman Silver Purchase Act?
--During the mid-1870s there was a lack of silver being mined in the United States;
Congress ordered the Treasury to stop making silver coins because of the lack of supply.
The discovery of silver in Nevada and Colorado led to calls for the restoration of silver as
legal tender; Congress responded by instructing the Treasury to buy up to $4 million in
silver each month and mint it into silver dollars. The Treasury, composed of gold
standard supporters, bought the silver, but refused to circulate the silver dollars into the
country. The anger over this action by the Treasury led to the passage of the Sherman
Silver Purchase Act; the law required the Treasury to buy 4.5 million ounces of silver and
to issue Treasury notes (redeemable in gold or silver) that equaled these purchases. The
intent was to increase the money supply, which it did, but the falling of silver prices
during the Panic of 1873 led to less Treasury notes being issued because of the relative
lack of silver.
*Why did the spoils system fail to produce the best results for the United States
government?
--Introduced during the Age of Jackson, the spoils system had morphed itself into the
most corrupt aspect of the United States government. Those that defended the system
(including Jackson) argued that it allowed for the democratic process of government
work to take form, frequently changing the government as presidents and political
parties entered and left. Unfortunately, the corruption in the spoils system led to
incompetence. Many of the appointees were not capable of fulfilling the requirements
of the jobs that they had been assigned; their only qualification was that they had
served whichever political party was in power faithfully. Many reformers in the
government called for a change to the archaic system.
*How did Garfield’s assassination lead to civil-service reform?
--As mentioned earlier, Garfield was assassinated by a man who believed his loyalty
should have resulted in a government position; his death made him a martyr of the
incompetence of the spoils system and an impetus for change. Ironically his successor,
Chester A. Arthur, was linked to spoils system corruption in New York. In fact, he had
been removed from office by Rutherford B. Hayes in a sweep against corruption; Arthur
was added to the Garfield’s ticked because of the relative health of Garfield and to
balance the ticket from the contentious state of New York. With his ascension to office,
many expected Arthur to continue the spoils system; instead he led to its downfall.
*What were the components of the Pendleton Civil Service Act?
--Largely as a memory to a fallen Garfield (and a shocked nation), Congress (with the
unequivocal support of Arthur passed the Pendleton Civil Service Act. The law brought
merit as a requirement for government work and contained the following components:
1. Prepare comprehensive examinations to decide who is fit for service
2. Establish standards of merit required for government work
3. Forbade political candidates from soliciting contributions from government
employees
*Describe the tumultuous Election of 1884.
--The Election of 1884 was one of the most personal and contested affairs in the history
of the United States. The Republicans nominated James G. Blaine on a platform that
attempted to rid itself of the corruption associated with the Grant presidency;
unfortunately for Blaine his own name was tainted with (validated) use of the spoils
system to railroad companies. The Democrats, sensing the public’s aversion to corrupt
politics, nominated Grover Cleveland renowned for his fights against the spoils system in
New York; immediately several Republican reformers jumped ship to support the
Democrat Cleveland. The contest was very close, based in large part because of
Republican attacks on the character of Cleveland for having an illegitimate child;
furthermore Tammany Hall in New York waged against him because of his push against
their corruption in New York. A New York City clergyman (Republican) gave a speech
denouncing the Democratic Party as one of “Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion”; Blaine did
not immediately condemn the remark and immigrants turned out in large numbers in
New York, giving Cleveland the state and the presidency.
*Describe Cleveland’s policy towards the economy.
--Cleveland reflected the Gilded Age presidents and philosophy of most Americans by
using a laissez-faire approach towards the economy. In many respects, Cleveland did
not understand the social impacts of industrialization, often imploring Americans to not
depend on the federal government to solve their problems. Cleveland often acquiesced
to business elite by not forcing regulation on industries by choosing to promote business
before everything else.
*What were Cleveland’s actions towards the tariff?
--The one economic issue that Cleveland did address was that of the tariff, although not
doing so until late in his first term as president. At this time the tariff was the major
source of income for the United States; the constant question amongst Americans was
how high or low the tariff should be:
a. Supporters of high tariffs: The supporters of high tariffs were those that enjoyed the
protection given by the tariff against foreign competition; additionally workers in
factories enjoyed the high tariff because it led to higher wages
b. Supporters of low tariffs: The supporters of low tariffs were those that enjoyed the
high tariff protection for finished goods, but wanted low tariffs for the raw materials
needed for to make their product (for example shoe manufacturers wanted protection
for their shoes, but low tariffs for the hides).
Cleveland took up the issue in 1887; his major problem with the high tariff was that it
created a large surplus; Congress would then distribute the money to their respective
states in pork-barrel projects. To Cleveland this created a system in which the American
citizens would become dependent on the federal government. In his annual address to
Congress, Cleveland asked for a lower tariff to reduce the federal surplus, reduce prices,
and curtail the growth of trusts. Although the lowered tariff did not immediately take
place, many business leaders were concerned with the direction of the Cleveland
presidency.
*Describe the corrupt Election of 1888.
--The talk of a lower tariff convinced many business leaders that a Cleveland reelection
would be disastrous for their futures. Cleveland also hurt his reelection chances by
going after the Grand Army of the Republic (GAR), a group of veterans that received
annual pensions from the federal government. Cleveland was not against pensions for
soldiers, but against false claims that were filed by some seeking money. The
Republicans nominated Benjamin Harrison, a condensing lawyer with very little
emotional appeal. The Republicans were aided greatly by donations from business
leaders (some $4 million) that allowed for the mass production and consumption of
buttons and posters. Cleveland won the popular vote by almost 100,000 votes, but lost
the key states of Indiana and New York and the presidency (don’t cry he comes back).
Harrison owed his victory to the business interests that put him there and he did not fail
to reward them and the GAR. Ignoring the fraud in the pension claims, the Harrison
presidency enacted the first large-scale welfare system in the history of the United
States. Additionally, business interests were served with the passage of the McKinley
Tariff, which elevated the rates to its highest levels.
*What motivating factors led to the growth of the Grange movement?
--The Harrison presidency (as was the case with most Gilded Age presidencies) had little
concern for the ills of industrialization, especially the plight of the agrarian community.
Farmers suffered from ecological disasters (grasshoppers!), large harvests that went
unsold, and massive debt to buy new machinery to harvest the crops. The farmers
looked to the federal government for assistance, but they were too preoccupied with
arguing about the tariff to really take notice (ok, that was unfair and biased, last time, I
promise). Instead, farmers turned to one another to survive the crisis; they formed
cooperative ventures and created the “Patrons of Husbandry” or the Grange. The
Grange offered information about farming, support, and communal fellowship.
Activities included studies on farming, planting, and livestock raising, social gatherings,
meals, and dances. The farmers of the Grange held true to the belief that the farming
was the basis of honorable wealth in the Jeffersonian and Jacksonian tradition; their
overall goal was to make the family farm self-sufficient again. Overall, the Grange
wanted to eliminate all those that made money off of their expense.
*Why were the Grangers against the railroads?
--The most detested aspect of industrial society for the members of the Grange were
the railroad owners. They felt (quite correctly) that the railroads purposefully hurt their
business by giving discounts to large shippers, bribing government officials, and charging
higher rates for short trips (involving most farm goods). The Grangers in the Midwest
successfully lobbied state legislatures to pass laws making these practices illegal.
*What was the importance of Munn v. Illinois?
--The railroads, upset at these so-called “Granger” laws took their claim to the Supreme
Court to declare them unconstitutional. The Court, however, favored the Grangers
claims, specifically in Munn v. Illinois. In its ruling the Court upheld an Illinois law that
set a maximum rate for the storage of grain, preventing unreasonable rate hikes by the
railroad companies. The legality of this decision was supported with the Constitution’s
granting of police power to the states.
*What was the importance of Wabash v. Illinois?
--The Court modified its decision in Munn by prohibiting states to regulate interstate
railroad rates in the case Wabash v. Illinois. In response, Congress passed the Interstate
Commerce Act that gave the federal government that power to oversee the actions of
the railroad companies.
*Why did the Grange movement prove to be unsuccessful?
--Ultimately, the Grange movement failed because of the persistence of the railroad
companies in making profit. The railroads may have lost the battle on the national level,
but were successful on the state level in getting many of the Grangers laws repealed.
Additionally, it became very difficult for the cooperative system to survive because they
were short on money; despite their hopes to the contrary, the farmers needed the
middlemen.
*Describe the balanced argument to the agrarian problem in the late 19 th century.
--The obvious emotions on both sides of the agrarian problem in the late 19th century
often presented arguments that were unfair and at times unbalanced; historical
perspective allows a calm and rational analysis of the situation. While the farmers’
complaints towards the railroads were valid, blaming these capitalists for the entirety of
the situation is overly simplistic. In reality, the depressions of 1873 and 1893 affected
the entire country, making it necessary for the railroad companies to charge higher
rates to survive (remember that many railroads lines did shutdown). The real problem
for farmers was that they had no leverage whatsoever in an industrial world. They
depended on others to make sure that their goods were transported and those people
were motivated by profit, just like the members of the Grange. Additionally, farmers
were at the whim of environmental disasters and fluctuations in the world market. In
short, although the railroads were certainly not the friend of the farmer, they were not
solely responsible for their plight.
*What was the impetus for the start of the Farmers Alliance movement?
--Although the Grange movement ultimately failed, it did pave the way for a more
influential group representing the rights of farmers, the Farmers Alliance. Whereas the
majority of the Grange movement was centered in the Great Plains, the Farmers
Alliance rose in conjunction with the agricultural problems in the South and the West.
As discussed in earlier chapters, the crop-lien and sharecropping systems had
devastated the moral and dignity of agricultural work; more troubling to the
Southerners was the fact that their crops were not as profitable as they used to be. The
Farmers Alliance initially tried the cooperative system (as introduced by the Grangers),
but the plan failed because of a lack of capital to sustain the system. Instead, the group
concentrated on gaining members (some 3 million by 1890) by using rallies, picnics, and
speakers to discuss their specific problems. This process led to the farmer realizing,
perhaps for the first time, their electoral importance.
*Describe the agricultural issues in the Great Plains and their influence on the Farmers
Alliance movement.
--Although centered in the South and West, agricultural disasters in the Great Plains led
to the spread in influence of the Farmers Alliance in that region. The initial protest
began with a drought in 1880 and 1881, but simmered after a return to normalcy in rain.
In fact, the end of the drought increased land speculation, as thousands migrated to
Kansas to take advantage of cheap land. Unfortunately, the drought returned some six
years later, compounded by a locust infestation of biblical proportions. Thousands left
Kansas to return east for survival; those that remained joined the Farmers Alliance. In a
testament to the times, Farmers Alliance leaders Tom Watson and Leonidas Polk were
able to convince farmers of different races and gender to cooperate with one another.
Thus, local affiliations of Farmers Alliance movements included white males, black
males, and women groups. Although not working extensively together (that is to say,
day to day) the different groups did unite to achieve political success.
*How did the agrarian discontent affect elections?
--The Farmers Alliance was able to unite its different factions to create a political agenda
that would address its concerns. The organization wanted to use the midterm elections
of 1890 to test their political power with the following agenda:
1. Tariff reduction
2. A graduated income tax
3. Public ownership of the railroad
4. Federal funding for irrigation research
5. Ban on land ownership for “non-citizens”
6. Free coinage of silver
The results of the 1890 elections demonstrate the depth of anger and power of
influence of the farmer on American elections. The South elected four Alliance
governors and took over eight states; additionally three Alliance senators and 50
congressmen went to Washington D.C. with support from angry farmers.
*Describe the factors leading to the formation of the Populist Party and their platform
in 1892.
--The success of the Farmers Alliance in the midterm elections of 1890 led to its
downfall in the Election of 1892. Many Northern Alliance leaders wanted to form a third
party, while Southern members felt that it would weaken the Democratic Party, needed
to maintain white supremacy in the region. Although not all Southerners supported it,
enough agreed with the third-party model for the Election of 1892; they took the
generic name of the People’s Party (hereafter known as the Populist Party). The
Populist Party platform included all of the agenda goals of the Farmers Alliance
movement and the direct election of senators to office. In order to make sure the entire
platform is known and remembered (while apologizing for redundancy), here is the
Populist Party platform for the Election of 1892:
1. Tariff reduction
2. Graduated income tax
3. Public ownership of the railroad
4. Federal funding for irrigation research
5. Ban on land ownership for “non-citizens”
6. Free coinage of silver
7. Direct election of senators
8. Crop storage plan for farmers (based on coop-model)
*How did the local Democratic Party in the South disenfranchise African-Americans?
--The Redeemers, or those in the South that were against Reconstruction policies,
dominated the region after the Compromise of 1877. The major goal in this policy was
to make sure that blacks did not vote; initially this was achieved through terrorism (the
KKK), coercion (informing blacks if they voted they could not shop at white stores),
intimidation, and voter fraud.
*How did the South legally make it difficult for blacks to vote?
--Hopefully you remember that the 15th amendment to the Constitution gave AfricanAmerican males the right to vote. The South, following the lead of Mississippi, enacted
several laws to limit the ability for blacks to vote. These “legal” maneuvers included the
following:
1. Literacy tests
2. Poll taxes
3. Property requirements
The obvious goal of this system was to limit black suffrage; this is fact is obvious with the
adoption of grandfather clauses that exempted anyone whose ancestors had voted in
the Election of 1860, obviously eliminating blacks since suffrage was not legal at time for
the entire black race.
*Describe the convict-lease system used in the South.
--Although technically free, the South was determined to keep blacks in positions of
social and economic inferiority. One manifestation of this policy was the adoption of
the convict-lien system in the South. Blacks were arrested for minor offenses, in many
cases not having a job, and forced to work for Southern industrial companies to pay off
their “bail”. In many cases this system was slavery by another name, as blacks were
placed in prison gangs to complete the work. The system alarmed many white laborers,
as they accurately saw the system as a threat to their economic opportunities in the
region.
*Why did the white elite attempt to fuel racism in the South?
--It should be noted that the major weapon for racist whites in the South was the fear of
the rope, or lynching by mobs that regularly executed black males for accusation of
crimes that often had little merit. This fear drove a racial wedge through most of the
efforts at unity among the races in regards to the poor farmer and the Populist Party.
White elites did not help the situation by purposely exploiting poor whites fear of an
economically equal black population. Many poor whites felt that if blacks were given
equal treatment they would fall lower down the economic ladder, with nothing to
distinguish them and their “whiteness”. The elite white population used this as a
political tool to mute the black vote in the South and maintain the dominance of the
Democratic Party in the region.
*What was the significance of Plessy v. Ferguson?
--The proponents of segregation in the South received their greatest legal victory with
the Supreme Court decision in Plessy v. Ferguson. The case involved a Louisiana law that
segregated railroad cars between whites and blacks; the Court ruled that this law was
constitutional as long as the public facilities were equal. Thus, the “separate but equal”
ideology was born, dominating race relations in the South for decades to come. As is to
be expected, many of the public facilities were indeed separate, but rarely equal. The
desegregation of the South would not come until the late 1950s after years of painful
struggle and protest by civil rights advocates of many races.
*What was the significance of the Civil Rights Cases?
--The Civil Rights Cases stand as a precursor to the Court’s future ruling in Plessy.
Congress had passed the Civil Rights Act of 1875 that prohibited racial discrimination on
juries and public facilities, such as hotels, theaters, and railroads. The Court ruled that
the 14th amendment only provided equal protected from the federal and state
governments; thus segregation and discrimination by private companies was legal. The
Court struck down the Civil Rights Act of 1875 as unconstitutional.
*What was the impact of Booker T. Washington towards racial politics in the United
States?
--Washington, who will get his deserved analysis in future chapters, differed from many
African-American leaders during the Gilded Age in his approach to race relations in the
country. Washington encouraged blacks to accept the racist society of the United States
because he believed that it would not change until blacks acquired the skills to be
economically valuable. He urged blacks to learn how to farm and become carpenters;
this would lead to gradual acceptance by the racist white society of the contribution to
blacks. Washington’s own story, found in his autobiography Up From Slavery, was the
basis for his argument; it would face harsh criticism from other black leaders in the early
20th century.
*How were racial beliefs the same in the North and the South?
--Many blacks left the racist South for greater economic opportunities in the North; if
they were expecting equal treatment with whites, they were severely disappointed.
Many of the racial attitudes of the South found its way to the North, as industrial
factories and other professions were segregated. Although the major labor unions,
Knights of Labor and the AFL, publicly endorsed black membership, in practice many
blacks were excluded from joining.
*What was the importance of the so-called “Solid South”?
--The “Solid South” refers to the social and political dominance of the Democratic Party
based on racist attitudes towards blacks. The Republican Party did not exist in the South
from 1880 until 1960; every election the same men were elected to Congress, gaining
seniority and influence, meanwhile preventing true racial equality from occurring in the
country. Additionally, the unity of the Southern Democratic Party made it the most
dominant faction in the national party; any Democratic president (or nominee) was
beholden to the “Solid South”.
*What group of people composed the Populist Party?
--In a manner of speaking, you can list all those that felt disadvantaged during the Gilded
Age as members of or supporters of the Populist Party. These included angry farmers,
people in the slums and ghettos, immigrant workers, and poor industrial laborers. The
party rested on the anger of those that felt they were not receiving their true worth
industrial United States.
*What was the Republican and Democratic response to the turmoil of the 1890s?
--Both established political parties reacted cautiously to the anger and turmoil of the
1890s, fearful of socialist tendencies invading the country. The candidates for president
from both parties largely ignored the unrest, instead focusing on standby topics such as
the tariff and the money question.
*Why was the Election of 1892 a disappointment for the Populist Party?
--After the success in the midterm elections of 1890 many in the Populist Party felt that
the Election of 1892 would reflect the anger of many against the establishment.
Instead, internal questions in the party led to widespread disappointment in the
election. The party did win some seats in the West and in some places in the South, but
did not register at all in New England, the East, or the Midwest (most embarrassing was
the lack of influence in the Great Plains). The reasoning for the poor showing in the
South is blamed on racism, loyalty to the Democratic Party, a dislike of the Populist
presidential candidate, and voter intimidation and fraud. Many Southern Populists
returned to the Democratic Party, all but killing any hopes of a presidential victory by a
Populist candidate in the future.
*What factors led to the Panic of 1893?
--The economic disaster in the 1890s was the worst of the century; it led to a depression
that lasted four years and affected every industry in the United States. There are
several factors for this destruction, but the most prominent (and often cited) is the
failure of the railroad industry. The industry, bolstered by the prosperity of the 1880s,
had issued more stock as investors clamored to get a piece of the pie. This overspeculation was fine during boom times, but the agricultural problems in the early
1890s slowed down the industry. Like a domino, steel and iron were affected by the
slowing; soon investors that had depended on the railroads for profits were now stuck
with losses.
*What led to weakened confidence in the gold standard?
--Adding to the economic troubles was a weakened gold standard (remember, the gold
standard was the American government’s pledge to back up all flowing currency with its
weight in gold). The loss of confidence on the gold standard is attributed to the
following:
1. A loss of gold reserves because of British investors converting their American dollars
to gold because of economic problems in their country
2. The use of surplus funds during the boom times of Harrison’s presidency
3. The Sherman Silver Purchase Act, which required the government to pay for its silver
purchases with either gold or silver; most chose gold, which reduced the amount of
available gold
4. The election of Cleveland in 1892 led many to believe that his party did not back the
gold standard
*How did the failure of the railroad industry rock the nation’s economy as a whole?
--Just as the railroad industry proved to be the tipping point for economic expansion
during the Gilded Age, it also spelled the end of prosperity. The first collapse of a
railroad company in 1893 led investors to convert their stock holdings to gold; the stock
prices immediately fell and gold reserves did as well. Within a few months, almost 100
railroad companies and 15,000 commercial institutions were finished. The result led to
a massive depression that nearly destroyed the American economy.
*Describe the human toll of the depression from 1893-1897.
--As is often the case, the true measure of a depression is not truly seen in numbers, but
rather in its affect on those suffering through it:
1. Massive unemployment left factories workers with no money to feed their families
2. Harsh winters, with many without homes, led to starvation and death
3. Farm prices led to the utter destruction of the agricultural sector
4. Many turned to protest in the form of labor strikes
*What was the significance of “Coxey’s Army”?
--Without the depression of 1893 Jacob Coxey would probably be unknown to history
(as is the fate of most of us). Instead, Coxey, a monetary genius, devised a public-works
program that would not be backed by gold but by legal tender (our system today).
Coxey organized a march to Washington for his ideas to be heard, picking up thousands
of supporters on the way. Once in Washington, Coxey and his army were arrested and
quickly dispersed; although not successful, Coxey’s Army would lay the groundwork for
future federal policy towards economic downturns.
*What was Cleveland’s response to the economic crisis?
--Cleveland held true to his beliefs about the economy, arguing that upswings and
downturns are part of the natural cycle in a capitalist economy (he was right). Thus,
Cleveland held true to his laissez-faire approach towards the economy, informing the
American public that it was not the duty of the government to help.
*How did business investors save the gold standard? Why did this hurt the Cleveland
presidency?
--Cleveland believed that the problem with the economy was the dwindling confidence
of the gold standard; if that was fixed, he believed, then the economy would recover (he
was wrong). He successfully lobbied Congress to repeal the Sherman Silver Purchase
Act, believing this would bring back gold reserves. Instead, the reserves continued to
dwindle. Cleveland turned to investment bankers, Morgan and Belmont to lend the
federal government $62 million in exchange for U.S. bonds at a discounted rate. The
federal government used to restore the gold standard. However, the handsome profit
made by Morgan and Belmont contributed to the feeling that the business leaders and
the government were working hand in hand with one another at the expense of the
poor.
*What was the importance of the case Pollack v. Farmers Loan and Trust?
--The case came from the arguments involving the Wilson-Gorman Tariff that imposed
an income tax of 2 percent on those that were affluent. The Supreme Court ruled that
the law was unconstitutional because it did not impose a direct tax on private property
based on the population of a state; the ruling was a victory for the wealthy and a blow
to recovering economy.
*How did the depression change social attitudes towards the poor?
--As you should remember, the poor during the Gilded Age were blamed for being poor
as if it was some sort of character flaw. The depression of 1893 convinced many
Americans that economic calamity could happen to even hard working people; social
work in the future would not focus on the poor themselves, but social causes of poverty
in a capitalist society.
*What was the importance of the midterm elections of 1894?
--The midterm elections revealed the anger and distrust of the Cleveland administration
and the Democratic Party. The Republican Party won both houses of Congress and
control of many “battleground” states that often determined presidential elections.
Additionally, the Populist Party saw massive gains, most impressively in the South, as
anger of the economic situation proved disastrous for the Democratic Party.
*Describe the arguments over the use of the gold or silver standard.
--Due in large part because of the economic depression, the major issue facing the
country towards the end of the 19th century continued to be the question of monetary
standards:
1. Gold standard position: A nation’s paper money must be backed by a valuable
material; otherwise uncontrolled inflation would destroy the economy
2. Silver standard position: Tight money supply led to lower prices for goods and a
ruined agricultural sector
*Describe the political platform of William Jennings Bryan in the Election of 1896.
--William Jennings Bryan represented the culmination of the silver advocates and the
agrarian sector’s attempt to gain the presidency. Young and charismatic, Bryan
electrified the Democratic Party at its nominating convention, securing the nomination
as a dark-horse candidate. Bryan advocated the use of silver and the protection of the
farming industry. The Populists were wary to join the Democrats in supporting Bryan,
but they realized that if they did not it would surely mean victory for the Republicans.
*Describe McKinley’s strategy in the Election of 1896.
--The Republicans nominated William McKinley, who was best known for creating the
highest tariff in United States history. McKinley’s campaign was managed by Mark
Hanna, who wisely did not highlight McKinley’s strengths as much as Bryan’s
weaknesses. Using posters, pamphlets, and editorials, Hanna (with $7 million in
donations from Morgan and Rockefeller) portrayed Bryan a radical and dangerous.
Conversely, McKinley was shown as safe and stable. As Bryan trekked the country to
have his message heard, McKinley quietly waited for Americans to come to his front
porch to hear his message. In an era filled with uncertainty, this strategy was one that
Americans were used to and could handle.
*Why was McKinley victorious in the Election of 1896?
--McKinley easily won the election, gaining more than 600,000 votes and taking 3 farm
states; Bryan only won the South and some of the West. Generally speaking, the
following reasons are usually given for his defeat:
1. Republican election tactics used by Hanna
2. Bryan’s appeal was limited; it offered nothing to immigrants, urban workers and the
middles class, or successful farmers
3. Urban voters realized that higher farm prices (a byproduct of free silver and part of
Bryan’s platform) would mean higher food prices
4. Some religions, Catholics and Jews, were fearful of Bryan’s Protestant rhetoric during
the election
*Why is the Election of 1896 commonly described as a “watershed” election?
--The term “watershed” is used by historians to describe an event that signals the end of
a movement or the beginning of another; the Election of 1896 can be deemed a
watershed election for the following reasons:
a. The idea of a United States built on the Jeffersonian model of agriculture was dead at
last; the majority of the country was under the umbrella of industrialization and farmers
were increasingly becoming a small minority of the population.
b. The use of a large “war chest” of money from the Republican Party to win the election
would forever make money an advantage in presidential politics.
c. The country would adopt the gold standard for the near future, ending the question
of free silver.
d. The foreign policy of the United States (discussed in the next section) would be
determined by the Republican Party, which would dominate the presidency (with the
exception of Woodrow Wilson’s two terms) for the next 36 years.
*Discuss the different arguments presented by those in favor of imperialism.
--The fact that it took over a century for the United States to become involved in
imperialism was a mixture of time, war, and circumstance. That the nation would dive
headfirst towards the movement in the late 19th and early 20th century should come as
no surprise for the following reasons:
1. The rest of the world, particularly Europe, was engaged in massive imperialism, taking
smaller countries for their economic benefit. The United States, by not becoming
involved in the process, risked falling behind other countries in an era where
industrialization promised potential for the United States becoming a world power.
2. The business community was largely in favor of imperialism because of a fear that
continued prosperity depended on the opening of oversea markets. Several financial
indicators that supply of U.S. products would outpace demand in the nation;
expansionist would not only save U.S. industry, but allow it to grow as well.
3. Fears of a weak military also spurred imperialistic ambitions. In an important work,
The Influence of Sea Power upon History (1890) Alfred T. Mahan captured the mood of a
large majority of the country when he asserted that the greatness of a nation depended
on the strength of its army. Mahan argued that the acquisition of foreign lands was
necessary for a strong global navy; success demanded United States imperialism.
4. Religious leaders also claimed that imperialism was necessary. Although one could
argue (and many have since) that the ambitions of this religious sentiment towards
conversion contained some elements of racism, many of the missionaries that went to
other countries were devoted to their goal of converting many to Christianity.
*Discuss the diplomatic situations that directly preceded the birth of American
imperialism at the end of the 19th century.
--As if practice for the real thing, several events directly preceded American imperialism:
a. The United States and England argued over fishing rights near Alaska. Ironically, this
minor event would represent the last time in the modern era where the United States
and England were on opposite sides. Many in the United States, still angry over the War
of 1812 and the acquisition of Oregon (seriously!) wanted war with England.
Fortunately, good sense (and other problems) prevented the U.S. government from
declaring war and the conflict was ended without armed conflict.
b. A civil war in Chile forced one of the sides in the conflict to attempt to buy weapons in
San Diego, California. The U.S. captured the vessel; almost simultaneously, two
unarmed U.S. soldiers were killed in Chile. Harrison (president at the time) wanted war,
but Chile apologized for the incident and paid an unnamed sum to make amends.
c. Earlier I praised the good sense of the American government in avoiding conflict with
the British; unfortunately poor judgment in continually challenging the British would
continue to make common sense a necessity by the government. England and
Venezuela were engaged in land dispute, only worsened by the discovery of gold in the
disputed territory. The United States offered to arbitrate the dispute; the British
disregarded the offer, going as far as to mock the Monroe Doctrine for having a
legitimate influence in international relations. Cleveland (president at the time) ignored
the British insult and created a special Senate committee to settle the dispute. England,
correctly sensing the American mood, accepted the commission’s findings and avoided
war with the United States.
d. The United States and Germany both had designs on the Samoan Islands; a hurricane
provided an impetus for war. Fortunately, England intervened and the three nations
created a “protectorate” over the islands.
*Describe American actions in Hawaii near the end of the 19 th century.
--The United States had been economically interested in the Hawaiian Islands for over a
century, as American sugar plantations were worked on by foreign laborers. The sugar
plantation owners forced an unfavorable constitution on the Hawaiian people in the
name of business, altering the composition of the independent nation that favored the
American businesses. In 1891, a new leader, Liliuokalani took the Hawaiian throne and
declared her distaste for American dominance. At the height of high tariffs, the United
States imposed its first tariff on the sugar industry, particularly in Hawaii. The decision
led to a decline of sugar prices in Hawaii some 40 percent; the American companies
helped to remove Queen Liliuokalani, declared the independence of Hawaii and asked
for U.S. annexation. Cleveland (president at the time) sent an envoy to the islands to
see if annexation was desired by the Hawaiians; the negative report forced Cleveland to
deny the request. In 1898 McKinley annexed the islands, making it a territory until
statehood was granted in 1959.
*Discuss the American involvement in the Cuban Revolution.
--Although the United States, Southerners in particular, had desired Cuba for decades,
the country was actually still part of the Spanish Empire. The Cuban Revolution was
organized in large part by Jose Marti and other Cuban exiles, who were angered by the
Spanish treatment of the island nation. American businesses and the government were
not keenly interested in the struggle because of financial contributions in Cuba and the
desire to avoid conflict with Spain over part of her empire. Uniquely, the American
public was responsible for getting the federal government behind the Cubans. It was
revealed to the American public (in one of the few instances of honest journalism during
the era) that a Spanish commander in Cuba was placing citizens in concentration camps,
many of which were ravaged by disease and malnutrition. The estimation that 200,000
Cuban citizens had died because of this treatment led many in the nation to call for U.S.
involvement.
*Describe yellow journalism and its impact on the Spanish-American conflict.
--Two newspaper editors, Joseph Pulitzer (World) and William Randolph Hearst (Journal)
competed with one another for readership in the late 19 th century; this competition
would lead to some of the most unscrupulous journalism in American history. The
nation was enthralled by the Cuban Revolution; both editors used this to their
advantage, creating the process known as yellow journalism. Neither paper was above
creating stories, sensationalizing actual events, and changing figures to fulfill
“journalistic” needs. In 1897 a more forgiving Spanish government tried to work out a
situation beneficial to the crown and the Cubans, but Hearst would not allow it. One of
his reporters received and published a letter from a Spanish official declaring President
McKinley “weak”. All that was missing from a declaration of war was an international
incident.
*Describe the Maine incident and how it would lead to the Spanish-American War.
--Sometimes circumstances have the ability to accelerate events beyond control. As
mentioned earlier, the United States was angered by a letter from a Spanish minister
insulting President McKinley; an “attack” on sea would provide the physical rationale for
war. In early 1898 a U.S. battleship, the Maine, was in a Havana battleship when it
exploded and killed 266 U.S. servicemen. The Spanish were immediately blamed for the
attack (a detailed report almost a century later would prove that explosions on the ship,
not the Spanish were responsible for the tragedy); although the Spanish denied any
such action, the public sentiment in the United States was in favor of war. As the
newspaper industry took advantage of the crisis, the Spanish government continued to
make concessions to avoid war. Unfortunately, many in the nation (especially Theodore
Roosevelt) wanted a war to introduce the United States to the world stage as an
industrialized world power. War was declared two months after the attack; in an
amendment to the declaration by a hereto unknown senator Henry M. Teller promised
that the United States only intention was to free the people of Cuba and have no
influence once that task was achieved.
*Discuss the actions involved in the Spanish-American War.
--As you undoubtedly know by now, most warfare bores me, as I am generally more
interested in why wars start than how they are ended. In this case, however, there is
not much action to discuss, since the “splendid little war” was so brief. Instead, I will
separate the discussion of the war into three separate parts:
a. Fighting: Spain, at this point, was basically a fragile empire near its end. The
Americans quickly blockaded the aging Spanish battleships. On land, the United States
quickly seized two Spanish strongholds. Within two months the United States had
defeated the Spanish at the cost of 379 lives (to combat); additionally, Theodore
Roosevelt became a celebrity, a stepping-stone to his place as one of the more iconic
presidents in the nation’s history.
b. Soldiers: Although the victory seemed easy, even “splendid” the soldiers experience
during the war was nowhere near that. Most of the troops were not prepared for
combat; perhaps more heinously, the U.S. government was not prepared for the
conditions of fighting. Soldiers were uniformed in wool uniforms in the humid Cuban
summer; 5,000 soldiers died from a combination of yellow fever, malaria, and food
poisoning during the war.
c. Racism: In a reflective of United States society during the late 1800s, the SpanishAmerican War was infiltrated with racism. Black soldiers volunteered during the war,
only to be denied service in Florida in restaurants and bars. In one instance of response,
black troops created riots in Tampa to protest the treatment. In transport to Cuba,
black and white troops were segregated, often resulting in black troops in cramped or
dirty quarters.
*Why have some historians (and contemporaries) deemed the peace process during
the Spanish-American War as hypocritical?
--Before we begin a discussion of the peace process, perhaps it is important to review
the goals of the war. First, the United States entered the war with the intention of
giving Cuba her independence. Secondly, the Teller Amendment promised no
interference by the United States in the affairs of Cuba. In late July the Spanish signed
an armistice that gave the United States the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Guam in
exchange for $20 million. Although the United States did create several programs to
improve Cuban life, they essentially violated the Teller Amendment. In its place
emerged the Platt Amendment that removed American troops from the nation, at the
requirement that Cuba agree to not make any treaty with any foreign nation (excluding
the U.S. of course) and to not borrow money from any nation that it could not pay back.
Additionally, the United States could intervene in Cuban affairs at its own discretion and
the U.S. was allowed to build a naval base on the island. With little option (U.S. troops
were still there) the Cuban government accepted the Platt Amendment.
*Explain the arguments of those against U.S. actions in Cuba.
--While many expansionists rejoiced at the American’s first attempt at imperialism, so
critics were wary of the potential for empire. The strongest argument presented by the
anti-imperialists was the sentiment that to rule people of other nations went against the
basic principles of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the reasons
behind the nation’s two most famous wars. Additionally, some business leaders were
worried that imperialism would hurt competition in the U.S., as the nation would be
flooded with cheap products. The expansionists were successful in ratifying the treaty
with Spain, most because of the mood of the country defined by McKinley’s
overwhelming victory in the Election of 1900.
*Discuss U.S. actions in the Philippines after the Spanish-American War.
--Once the treaty ceded major tracts of land had been granted to the United States all
pretense to gain an empire went out of the window. Many expansionists wanted to
take advantage of the Philippines to open up prospects in China (on the verge of being
divided by the European powers). McKinley defended the acquisition of the Philippines
on the belief that it would be in the best interest of the Americans if they Christianize
the Filipinos (already a Christian nation). Unfortunately for McKinley, acquisition of the
nation would require the use of troops in guerilla conflict. Led by Emilio Aguinaldo, the
Filipinos fought valiantly to protect the independence they felt was guaranteed after the
removal of the Spanish. The fighting continued for over a year; at the end the atrocities
by Americans were so widespread that the U.S. Senate held meetings to hear witness
accounts about the actions of soldiers. As was the case with other acquired territories,
the United States embarked on a confusing era of imperialism, in which they viewed
foreigners with an awe of condemnation, while attempting to exploit their national
resources for the growth of the American empire.