Chicago Swells the Surging Throng, 1886-87

Look round, the Frenchman loves its blaze,
The sturdy German chants its praise,
In Moscow's vaults its hymns are sung,
Chicago swells the surging throng.
--The Red Flag

Nathan Fine's fascinating 1928 book *Labor and Farmer Parties in the United States 1828-1928*, pp. 53-55, notes that Henry George's unsuccessful campaign for mayor of New York City was far from the only "radical" movement in the US to score a near-breakthrough in electoral politics in the 1880's, and that Chicago was in some ways "more representative of the big cities of the country as a whole":

"Contrary to the oft-expressed easy generalization that the Haymarket bomb destroyed the Chicago labor movement, the fact is that despite police repression, newspaper incitement to hysteria, and organization of the possessing classes, which followed the throwing of the bomb on May 4, 1886, the Chicago wage-earners only united their forces and stiffened their resistance. The conservative and radical central bodies-—there were two of the trade unions and two also of the Knights of Labor-—the socialists and the anarchists, the single taxers and the reformers, the native born and English-speaking workers and the foreign born Germans, Bohemians, and Scandinavians, all got together for the first time on the political field in the summer following the Haymarket affair. Chicago was the banner city of the general strike for eight-hours in May, 1886, with over 80,000 on the streets in the first four days. Thereafter the Knights of Labor doubled its membership, reaching 40,000 in the fall of 1886. On Labor Day the number of Chicago workers in parade led the country. Moreover, in this city the leaders of the labor movement were not intellectuals as in New York, but members of trade unions and labor assemblies. The labor party in i886 was one answer-—as it always has been—-of an awakened and powerful trade union movement, led by militant men. In 1918 and 1919, after the Chicago Federation of Labor went ahead and organized packing-house and steel workers at home to make this country safe for democracy, the federation took the next step and launched the Cook County Labor Party. The same men who backed up the union organization campaigns, John Fitzpatrick and Edward Nockels, president and secretary of the city central body, were responsible for the labor party. And William Z. Foster, who was enabled to use his brains because he closely cooperated with these men at that time, wore a delegate's badge in the labor party convention. Then we had, as in 1886, a bona fide and a real united front, on the economic and political fields.

"The Chicago labor party of 1886 was constituted in the same way as the Cook County Labor Party of 1919. Both were made up of delegates from the trade unions. The first conference met on August 21, 1886, but had to adjourn to the 23rd, to get rid of the influence of labor leaders wedded to the old parties. On September 27 the United Labor Party nominated a state and county ticket, with Frank Stauber, a socialist and ex-alderman, for county treasurer. The preamble to the platform pointed to the "power of aggregated wealth" over the old parties, and declared that the "time has come to drive the political go-between from our ranks. . . It is impossible for a trade unionist or a Knight of Labor to be an active political worker in the Republican or Democratic Parties and remain an honest man in the ranks of labor." A national, state, and local platform was adopted. Demands were made for an eight-hour day for all government employees and for the employees of corporations given special privileges, government ownership of all means of communication, an anti-contract labor law, a national monetary system, tax reform, forfeiture of all unearned land grants, restrictions upon the ownership of land, the reservation of all public lands to actual settlers, abolition of private police, weekly payment of wages, an employers' liability law, state insurance, and the abolition of contract convict labor. The result of the first campaign bore out John Swinton's statement that "the labor vote has been the heaviest in those cities where the despotism of judges, politicians, and the police was the severest." Stauber received 24,845 votes out of a total of 92,493. The labor party elected one state senator and sent six to the lower house, but failed to elect a congressman by only 64 votes. Five of the six judges-—running on old party tickets-—whom the laborites endorsed, in part because they did not have trained men to fill those positions and in part because the life of the labor movement was at stake, were also elected.

"Preparations followed for the spring election. The old parties put up only one candidate for mayor. They were genuinely concerned. The United Labor Party nominated Robert Nelson, a molder by trade and master workman of District Assembly 24 of the Knights of Labor. In this election the opposition was determined to beat the "red-flag communists." Police superintendent Ebersold personally instructed the police to vote against the labor party candidates. Despite this kind of attack Nelson rolled up 25,410 votes against 51,401 for the democratic-republican candidate. This marked the high-water point of the party. William Gleason, a member of the executive committee, bought off by a clerkship in the election commissioners' office, in collusion with the democrats started a party which he called the United Labor Party, and incorporated it, too ! In the fall of 1887 his party, popularly known as the Free Lunch Party, endorsed the democratic candidates. The Radical Labor Party—the name adopted because of Gleason's act—-received about 7,000 votes in November, 1887. In the national election of 1888 the Chicago movement supported the Union Labor Party candidate for president and gave him 2,180 votes. The trade unions and local assemblies were now on the decline; the workers had shown that they could make a powerful protest, but that they were not yet able to build a permanent and growing independent political movement.

"In Milwaukee, where the eight-hour strike in May, 1886, led to bloodshed, the labor party elected a congress-man and carried the city in 1886 and 1887. Of the cities where labor tickets were put up from coast to coast in the spring of 1887, Cincinnati was lost by only a few hundred votes, while about twenty smaller communities were won."

I will write in another post of the failure of the Labor Party movement of 1919-1923 and how it was ultimately wrecked by the Communist Party, with William Z. Foster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Z._Foster betraying his old friend John Fitzpatrick. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Fitzpatrick_(unionist) Here I want to concentrate on the Chicago labor party of 1886-7--and above all on what would have happened if it had won the mayoral race in 1887. The race could have been very close if the Republicans and Democrats had not united behind John A. Roche. http://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=486010 gives figures only slightly different from Fine's: 68.23% for the Republican (and Democratic) candidate Roche, 31.27% for the Labor candidate Nelson, and 0.5% for the Prohibitionist. If the two major parties had not united, it would not be inconceivable for Nelson to win with, say, 34 percent of the vote to 33 percent each for the Democrats and Republicans.

Nelson would of course face a hostile City Council, but arguably he could do some things on his own, like easing up on police repression of the labor movement. With Nelson controlling patronage, people like Gleason might have less incentive to desert the labor party. And even if Nelson were defeated in the next election--the Republicans and Democrats will probably *eventually* unite to defeat him--his election in 1887 might be an inducement for independent labor politics in other cities--which, as Fine noted, had scored a victory in Milwaukee and a near-victory in Cincinnati...

Also interesting would be the election of a Chicago Laborite to Congress in 1886, which as Fine mentions, almost happened. For another account of 1886:

"The State and Congressional elections of November, 1886, produced many surprises. In Cook county, the United Labor ticket, which was conceded from 12,000 to 15,000 votes, polled 25,000 and was the means of defeating many Democrats. Had the ticket not been tainted with Socialism and the laboring men had realized their strength, it is now believed they would have polled 35,000 votes in Cook county. Mayor Carter H. Harrison was tendered the unanimous nomination for Congress by the Third district Democratic convention, but declined on the score that his candidacy would not be of any benefit to the general county ticket. In this district the Republican candidate, William E. Mason, polled 13,721 votes, and Goodhue, United Labor, 6,352. In the Second district, where Congressman Frank Lawler's re-election was deemed certain, the Socialists voted the United Labor ticket solidly, and Daniel Gleason, their candidate, nearly tied Lawler. The first returns gave Lawler sixty plurality, and subsequently, by the official count, this was reduced to sixteen..."
https://books.google.com/books?id=uZkGAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA609
 
Obviously, Henry George winning the New York mayoralty would be an even bigger (immediate) deal--but by 1888 George would return to the Demcorats because of Cleveland's support for lower tariffs. So a victory of the labor party in Chicago could have more long-term consequences.
 
Top